All of the UA/NW bickering is really laughable - the companies are employing vastly different TPAC strategies, BOTH of which are (or have the potential to be) successful. There is money to be made both in maintaining a strong NRT hub AND in offering NRT-bypass flights. The more important thing, IMHO, is for both carriers to continue improving their premium cabins in order to effectively compete against the likes of JL, NH, SQ, and CX.
United Eyeing Nwa Stronghold
- Thread starter C54Capt
- Start date
North by Northwest
Veteran
I beg to differ...the DIFFERENCE between the two's Pacific strategy is one is not in BK (yet) and the other has been operating in BK going on 3 years, and THAT's with revenue from "Pan Am's" wonderful LHR Hub to boot! How's that for the NON-STOP strategy!avek00 said:
North by NW,
I can appreciate you working for NW and buying into the no First Class to Asia strategy. I can appreciate NW's everything must go to NRT business but there are other ways of doing things. That's why Singapore & Cathay are leaving NW in the dust, just some thoughts from a comsumer going to Hong Kong nonstop in Business Class.
I can appreciate you working for NW and buying into the no First Class to Asia strategy. I can appreciate NW's everything must go to NRT business but there are other ways of doing things. That's why Singapore & Cathay are leaving NW in the dust, just some thoughts from a comsumer going to Hong Kong nonstop in Business Class.
Cosmo
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 840
- Reaction score
- 0
North by Northwest:North by Northwest said:
It's pretty clear that you are the one in this discussion that doesn't have a good understanding of how the aviation industry works! This discussion is about international service generally (and Transpacific service specifically) offered by United, Northwest and other carriers, and the best you can do is show tables from the BTS containing domestic data? Do you somehow think that strengthens your arguments, some of which are little more than ranting? Whether deserved or not, you come across as just another teenage "Airliners.net" armchair CEO wannabe.
Did you know that United (and the other U.S. carriers as well) are required by the SEC and DOT to report results by operating entity? That's why it's not "cooking the books" to say that United made money during the 2nd quarter on its Transpacific operations while it lost significantly more money on a systemwide basis.
Did you know that United filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on December 9, 2002 (or just over 22 months ago)? Or did you just make up the "going on 3 years" line because it sounded more dramatic? Everybody knows that United is in Chapter 11, including the Japanese and other passengers who seem to be filling United's Transpacific flights just fine (with a load factor of over 80% in September 2004). So get over it already.
Just to be clear, it's obvious that Northwest is currently in much better financial shape than United, and it's equally obvious that Northwest has a bigger Japan route network than United. If you actually read my previous posts, you'll see that I never claimed otherwise. But it's just as obvious that United has a much better non-NRT Transpacific route network than Northwest does at this time, and this comparison isn't even close. That's one reason why United's Transpacific yield was 0.76¢ higher than Northwest's during the 2nd quarter of 2004. And if you can't see that, you're letting your emotions blind you to the facts.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
I believe Cosmo does see the big picture. Although I certainly respect NW, I think they may have painted themselves into a corner by not having a long range midsize aircraft that can be used to fly point to point routes. What has happened on the Atlantic with the 767 will happen on the Pacific - flights will no longer go through New York City, Chicago, or Atlanta on one end and London, Paris, or Frankfurt on the other but are now bypassing hubs. Pacific routes right now are even more hub centered but that will change in the next couple years as AA and CO especially start 777 service from non-traditional Asian gateways nonstop to markets which previously have been served through hubs in Asia.
I appreciate NW's conservative financial position but there is a real risk of losing out in the marketplace by not investing in the tools necessary to serve the customer the way they want to be served. Who knows, may NW really would be content to sell themselves to another carrier in the coming US legacy consolidaiton. With someone elses point to point service and NW's NRT hub, there would be one awesome airline.
I appreciate NW's conservative financial position but there is a real risk of losing out in the marketplace by not investing in the tools necessary to serve the customer the way they want to be served. Who knows, may NW really would be content to sell themselves to another carrier in the coming US legacy consolidaiton. With someone elses point to point service and NW's NRT hub, there would be one awesome airline.
North by Northwest
Veteran
"United's Transpacific yield was 0.76¢ higher than Northwest's" Dear Cosmo, please post the link for "your" yield reference. We would love to see United's improvement that you think is the where with all. Furthermore, United has been flying non stops since buying PAA's routes...where is it now? You people love to rant and rave about how fantastically superior your BANKRUPT airline is while flying Pan Am's global routes. News flash! Your stategy has FAILED. so you really are in no position to suggest to ANY airline NOT in bankruptcy as to what they should or should not be doing. It is quite laughable when a United employee is telling the world what NWA should be doing accross the Pacific. United hasn't even lasted 20 years in the international arena yet you are going to inform NWA(who's been cossing the Pacific for 57 years) how to do it? United is getting ready to fade faster than that Great airline PAA, only it will be less missed.Make sure you put your stats where your mouth is. I am sure an experienced CEO like yourelf will have no problem demonstrating United's improvement...if it;s real. (snicker) Sorry if your childish naming calling didn't upset me...I got a good laugh out of it. 
Suggesting that NWA bypass their NRT hub in favor of point-to-point flights is like suggesting UAL abandon their Chicago hub and concentrate on point-to-point flights in the Midwest. In both cases the airlines use the hub and spoke model because they feel that it is an efficient use of their resources.
Several times over the last few years, articles in trade publications like Air Transport World have referred to the NRT hub as Northwest's greatest asset, so pardon us if we don't dismantle it just yet.
Several times over the last few years, articles in trade publications like Air Transport World have referred to the NRT hub as Northwest's greatest asset, so pardon us if we don't dismantle it just yet.
NWA/AMT,
No one is suggesting NW DISMANTLE the NRT hub, it is the great asset; no one on this board has ever suggested that and for to suggest it, shows a weakness in your point of view.
Any nonstop flight to Hong Kong or other Asian point nonstop from the 48 states would a supplement to the NRT hub. This is my view wether its NW or UA. Nonstop to any Asian city from any USA city is expands choice to today's most important continent. UA's SFO, LAX, ORD & NRT are hubs for Asia giving travelers more choice.
UA's BK were not caused by its operations in Asia. It was caused by a bad CEO giving too much to Pilots (then other airlines did too, like Delta), 9/11( no could have seen that coming) & not enough passenger in 2002 & 2003. High fuel prices, somwthing NW is no more ammune to then any other airline except one owned by an oil producing state.
No one is suggesting NW DISMANTLE the NRT hub, it is the great asset; no one on this board has ever suggested that and for to suggest it, shows a weakness in your point of view.
Any nonstop flight to Hong Kong or other Asian point nonstop from the 48 states would a supplement to the NRT hub. This is my view wether its NW or UA. Nonstop to any Asian city from any USA city is expands choice to today's most important continent. UA's SFO, LAX, ORD & NRT are hubs for Asia giving travelers more choice.
UA's BK were not caused by its operations in Asia. It was caused by a bad CEO giving too much to Pilots (then other airlines did too, like Delta), 9/11( no could have seen that coming) & not enough passenger in 2002 & 2003. High fuel prices, somwthing NW is no more ammune to then any other airline except one owned by an oil producing state.
North by Northwest
Veteran
Dear Cosmo, It' s called a Quarterly 10k. Please read your post and you will learn what ranting is. Northwest was flying non-stops to Asia when United's non-stops ment NY-LA. Northwest will re-launch it's non-stops when it sees fit. We've been flying the Pacific since the beginning. We've seen them come and and we've seen them go and out lasted them all....next.Cosmo said:
North by Northwest
Veteran
WorldTraveller:Who knows, may NW really would be content to sell themselves to another carrier in the coming US legacy consolidaiton. With someone elses point to point service and NW's NRT hub, there would be one awesome airline. Dear World, are you familiar with the current state of the Industry? Based on survivor skills alone, it is FAR more likely that NWA will be the airline doing the purchasing. One thing you can bet on... of the airline logos still standing in 5 years, one will be RED.
JFK777 said:
Actually, when we have done direct flights to Asia in the past, it drew traffic from our NRT hub and often put 'beyond' passengers on our competitors flights who could have been on our own and so could be seen as 'dismantling' that hub in a way. Every time we try it we learn that lesson again.
I would certainly like to see us have the fleet, and the marketing, to be able to do both, but the unique presence we have had in Japan made it less desirable to do that. The fact that the decision to place A320s in service at NRT, after the older 747s were withdrawn, led to the assignment of 757s there shows there are still opportunities for growth at NRT for NWA and, given the current circumstances, I'd rather see them focus on that. The A330 would be quite adequate there.
I think that the feed from the US West Coast cities like PDX to the NRT hub has proven successful and I'd like to see more of that type of growth if we are able to work it into the schedule at NRT. What I DON'T want to see is us doing something just because someone else is doing it, regardless of whether it would really work for us. THAT strategy hasn't proven successful.
Knowing NWA, they have people looking at direct service and if it will work they will do it.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
N by NW,
Your admiration for your company is commendable. Might I remind you that in the airline industry, reputation and past actions have little to no correlation to the ability to persevere and survive today. The primary reason why NW and CO are doing as well as they are today is because both came within in an inch of their life in the last 10-15 years; thankfully, management and employees don't soon forget that and have been more willing to help their company and think creatively than have the employees and management at the big three. No one in the airline industry has a guarantee of success these days. Yes, NW may well be around and could well be an acquirer. But NW, just like any other airline, could be acquired by another airline. Take a look back at NW's financial statements in the late 90s and you'll see that NW was able to accumulate significant amounts of cash; ANY of the surviving legacies are no less capable of doing the same during the turnaround that will certainly follow the current crisis.
Your admiration for your company is commendable. Might I remind you that in the airline industry, reputation and past actions have little to no correlation to the ability to persevere and survive today. The primary reason why NW and CO are doing as well as they are today is because both came within in an inch of their life in the last 10-15 years; thankfully, management and employees don't soon forget that and have been more willing to help their company and think creatively than have the employees and management at the big three. No one in the airline industry has a guarantee of success these days. Yes, NW may well be around and could well be an acquirer. But NW, just like any other airline, could be acquired by another airline. Take a look back at NW's financial statements in the late 90s and you'll see that NW was able to accumulate significant amounts of cash; ANY of the surviving legacies are no less capable of doing the same during the turnaround that will certainly follow the current crisis.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 21,709
- Reaction score
- 10,662
N by NW,
Your admiration for your company is commendable. Might I remind you that in the airline industry, reputation and past actions have little to no correlation to the ability to persevere and survive today. The primary reason why NW and CO are doing as well as they are today is because both came within in an inch of their life in the last 10-15 years; thankfully, management and employees don't soon forget that and have been more willing to help their company and think creatively than have the employees and management at the big three. No one in the airline industry has a guarantee of success these days. Yes, NW may well be around and could well be an acquirer. But NW, just like any other airline, could be acquired by another airline. Take a look back at NW's financial statements in the late 90s and you'll see that NW was able to accumulate significant amounts of cash; ANY of the surviving legacies are no less capable of doing the same during the turnaround that will certainly follow the current crisis.
Your admiration for your company is commendable. Might I remind you that in the airline industry, reputation and past actions have little to no correlation to the ability to persevere and survive today. The primary reason why NW and CO are doing as well as they are today is because both came within in an inch of their life in the last 10-15 years; thankfully, management and employees don't soon forget that and have been more willing to help their company and think creatively than have the employees and management at the big three. No one in the airline industry has a guarantee of success these days. Yes, NW may well be around and could well be an acquirer. But NW, just like any other airline, could be acquired by another airline. Take a look back at NW's financial statements in the late 90s and you'll see that NW was able to accumulate significant amounts of cash; ANY of the surviving legacies are no less capable of doing the same during the turnaround that will certainly follow the current crisis.
North by Northwest
Veteran
"The primary reason why NW and CO are doing as well as they are today is because both came within in an inch of their life in the last 10-15 years" I am afraid you are dead wrong on that my friend. The present state of the airline industry has absolutly NOTHING to do with what happened to NWA in the early 90's. It was caused by an LBO which can never happen again in the airline industry. It happened to NWA after over 40 years of straight profits, because of it's wholly owned fleet and large cash reserves. We are where we are becasuse of a sound solid operation...period.
