EWR764

"Underperformance" (as compared to whom?) aside, the statement I made was in response to a post that United is "killing off" the Pacific network.

It's not. Full stop.

A great deal of speculation and jumping to conclusions here based on pretty flimsy data (fares for sale and seat maps on the public website) for two routes that literally just started. SFO-SIN is an unreasonable comparison, as SIN is a long-established, mature market for United. There are very few parallels to the launch of a less-than-daily longhaul route to a new station in an emerging market during a tourist-oriented travel season.

I know it's a bit of a game here to cheerlead for United failures, especially to the extent they involve anything perceived to be derived from the Continental strategy, but this is really grasping at straws, IMO.

notquiteaff

HKG-SGN is shorter than LAX-SEA. Less than a thousand miles. Wide body or narrow body really makes little difference to me. Chances are I would be in coach anyway. E+ might be nice, actually (do the Continental Micronesia 737s have that?)

Perhaps Skywest could take over the route with a CR2

harryhood

Folks, the NH announcement and the UA annoucnement have to be read together. NH and UA must be JV'ing or otherwise revenue sharing some part of the NRT-SGN trip where passengers connect from US-NRT.

As much as I dislike the NH 767 in Y and J, having a day flight is now my go-to for this route, especially seeing as DEN is my home and you have the NRT-DEN flight. I also like having 2 NH options in the evening from NRT-SGN, in case my ex-US flight goes sideways.

On the way home, my options before were to take the redye on NH with 4 Advil to preempt back troubles, rent a day room at NRT for 4 hours to catch up on the sleep I lost on that torture chamber 767, and then catch the DEN flight home. Or take UA at 5am through HKG and SFO, which added an unnecessary stop.

FWAAA

Exactly!

http://www.traveldailymedia.com/2387...o-twice-daily/

The joint venture with NH is a good thing for UA, as it eliminates a competitor and increases the odds of a profitable Asian network.

This is no different than UA teaming up with NH on USA-BKK by giving the NRT-BKK flights to NH. Short-haul flights in Asia are best left to hometown carriers.

For everyone who is angry that UA won't be flying HKG-SGN, let me pose this: Should NH fly IAH-CUN instead of relying on UA for that short segment? Of course not. How about EWR-BDA? Again, NH has a perfect joint venture partner for that route. Same thing with IAH to the Caribbean or Central America (eg, Antigua or Costa Rica).

Sure, everyone would prefer a UA 744 or 777 on those short NRT-Asia 5th freedom routes, but UA and NH would prefer to leverage their permission to violate the antitrust laws in hopes of earning more money. At least UA has a joint venture partner to share revenues and profits.

5khours

1. Not to be argumentative but I would agree and amplify on what spin88 has said, i.e. UA is just not competitive on TPAC unless there are subsidies or restricted competition. The only thing that has kept UA's Asia business from becoming a total debacle is the growth of the China market. As they say, a rising tide lifts all boats... or in the case of a wreck like UA, it slows the rate at which it's sinking.

2. Pretty sure the UA/NH JV rev/cost share does not extend to the rest of Asia, where it's just limited to some coordination on fares and schedule.

3. Flew the VN 789 J product SGN>NRT last night. UA was smart to get out of the market. As I have said UA is utterly uncompetitive on product and costs.

4. VN has clearly stated it can't fly non-stop to the US with their current 789s and 359s. They are waiting for the 359-ULR. Not sure I would agree with spin88 that it's a function of premium traffic. There's a lot of premium traffic into and out of SGN and if you consider connecting traffic to HAN, BKK, PNH, CGK, KUL, I suspect they will have no problem filling the front of the plane.

AndyInSaigon

I agree with spin88. It will be very difficult to fill that front cabin with paid seats.

There are few US businesses that have Asian operations only in VN. Most have operations elsewhere in Asia & SGN is just part of a wider Asia trip.

Awful airline. They have new pretty airplanes with more recent products. Their operation is weak & not customer friendly (just getting a refund on a fully refundable ticket is a trying experience). I could go on, but those who do not live here just will not understand.

5khours

I know which is why I think they won't have a problem filling the front because of the connecting traffic.


Don't live there but I have a house in Phu Nhuan and spend two weeks a month there. My experience with VN has always been positive but I guess YMMV.

AndyInSaigon

Usually it's just an intermediate stop. Eg: Fly out to SIN, visit KUL, BKK, SGN, last stop HKG (only a contrived example!) There are many who fly more often than I, but few have regularly flown SGN-US longer than me. From talking with other passengers, agents & FAs over the years, I believe that all the TPAC paid J travelers to VN (on BR, CI, etc) may fill one small J cabin on a daily basis. I just don't believe it's there, at least not yet.

We're not neighbors but not too far apart. I'm in Tan Binh.

I'll admit bias against VN, but I do hope they improve. In general good customer service is not common in Vietnam. Long term employment with the same company is not common either.

I have no particular insight to VN, but I lived next door to a pilot for some years. He told me that FA retention is as bad a problem for VN as programmer retention is for me.

Way off topic so I'll quit boring everyone.

5khours

I think it might depend on company size. Small enterprise... great service, great employee loyalty, hardworking, entrepreneurial. Big government affiliated enterprise... pretty much the opposite. Buddy of mine used to be head of Viettel. Said it was a total {mess}.

AndyInSaigon

Good point & I agree!

AndyInSaigon

Just talking offline with another FTer & had a thought: SIN & UA are supposed to start codesharing. I wonder if UA intends to codeshare with SQ on SIN-SGN & push their VN traffic to the SFO-SIN flight?

Probably not, but the connection times are good unlike arriving on the HKG flight at 01:00 & having to overnight.

hirohito888

Maybe because you're paying for your 50 year old auntie and her 2 kids to go back to SGN for the summer, and UA is cheaper than CX and you know your auntie and her 2 kids don't care if it's a widebody or not, don't care about frequent flyer miles, and never heard of FT? ...I guess this doesn't fit the "money-making" profile.

FWAAA

I would bet money that UA intends to push its Viet Nam traffic to its immunized joint venture partner ANA via the NRT-SGN flights that go double daily this fall. And I would bet against UA actively trying to flow USA-SGN trafic over SIN.

mduell

That's exactly the low-margin VFR traffic people have been talking about for the US-SGN market.

5khours

If I'm paying for auntie, she's going non-stop on VN or thru TPE on BR because both of those airlines have much lower costs structures than UA and are going to be cheaper.

No JV revenue/cost share on intra-Asian flights. They may do this, but they're just giving revenue to a competitor. So basically they share the over-water revenue (that they had to themselves) with NH and lose all the revenue on the leg to Saigon.

This is nothing more than a poorly organized retreat out of Asia.