Community
Wiki Posts
Search

UA Delays Launch of SFO-CAN (Guangzhou)

 
Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 11, 2008, 5:04 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Clinging to the edifices of a decadent past from the biggest city in America nobody really cares about.
Programs: (ಠ_ಠ)
Posts: 9,077
UA Delays Launch of SFO-CAN (Guangzhou)

Does anyone have any official information on this?
Posted by PA110, at airliners.net
"United applied to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to defer the start of nonstop flights between San Francisco and Guangzhou for one year. This is one of many difficult decisions that United must make in an environment when oil prices are at $100-plus per barrel, when at the time United originally applied for the route, the jet fuel price was around US$72 a barrel."
[Edited to add]

Looks like UA's now officially announced the delay of CAN by 1 year due to fuel.

Last edited by J.Edward; Apr 14, 2008 at 6:15 am
J.Edward is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 5:17 pm
  #2  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 23,999
Interesting, although I'll believe it when I see it. That should be a pretty profitable route, based on the limited info I have, but I'm not sure what they'd do with the 777 otherwise. Yeah, oil prices are high, but we don't see UA grounding their whole fleet as a result, they have to fly somewhere.
lucky9876coins is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 5:21 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 4,772
They are not canceling it, they applied today to the DOT to postpone launch of service by one year. Citing reasons of high oil prices and downturn in the economy.
worldtrav is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 5:34 pm
  #4  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: NYC
Programs: No longer loyal "over-entitled" 1K
Posts: 3,822
Wow... I thought SFO-CAN would be profitable even at $100/barrel oil price.
I work in import business, and still see tons of cargo coming into our warehouse by air from Guanzhou/Shenzen area.
kkjay77 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 5:55 pm
  #5  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Programs: The opinions expressed here are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect the airlines I worked for.
Posts: 1,894
Originally Posted by worldtrav
They are not canceling it, they applied today to the DOT to postpone launch of service by one year. Citing reasons of high oil prices and downturn in the economy.
Not to dis airliners.net, but is there a better source that verifies this? Very surprising as SFO-CAN has no nonstop competition and United fought so hard to get that (very profitable) route.
John26 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 6:28 pm
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: What I write is my opinion alone..don't read into it anything not written.
Posts: 9,686
Originally Posted by kkjay77
Wow... I thought SFO-CAN would be profitable even at $100/barrel oil price.
I work in import business, and still see tons of cargo coming into our warehouse by air from Guanzhou/Shenzen area.
ORD-KIX didn't survive at $72/bbl, so what one thinks will be profitable and what is are not the same. Clearly someone at WHQ thought it would, or we never would have started it...and they were wrong.
fastair is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 6:33 pm
  #7  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: NYC
Programs: No longer loyal "over-entitled" 1K
Posts: 3,822
Originally Posted by fastair
ORD-KIX didn't survive at $72/bbl, so what one thinks will be profitable and what is are not the same. Clearly someone at WHQ thought it would, or we never would have started it...and they were wrong.
Well... I believe Osaka isn't as cargo happy as Guanzhou/Shenzhen area. Maybe I was wrong.
kkjay77 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 6:36 pm
  #8  
Formerly known as aep
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: PAE - born, MEL-dwelling
Programs: Nothing special in many programs
Posts: 382
I just spent a while poking around regulations.gov looking for any documents relating to the word "Guangzhou" as well as a separate search for "United Airlines" posted in the last 30 days, and I couldn't find any document referencing this.
richmond3121 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 6:39 pm
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SJC/SFO/OAK
Programs: BD Gold (and future SEN), 0.2MM AA EXP, HHonors Gold, SPG Gold
Posts: 3,107
Originally Posted by John26
Not to dis airliners.net, but is there a better source that verifies this? Very surprising as SFO-CAN has no nonstop competition and United fought so hard to get that (very profitable) route.
I wouldn't quite say "fought so hard to get". They were the only airline applying for the CAN rights.
cstead is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 6:39 pm
  #10  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 20,404
Originally Posted by John26
Not to dis airliners.net, but is there a better source that verifies this? Very surprising as SFO-CAN has no nonstop competition and United fought so hard to get that (very profitable) route.
A friend who works for UA mentioned there was a blurb posted on UA's intranet.
UNITED959 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 6:41 pm
  #11  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 20,404
Originally Posted by cstead
I wouldn't quite say "fought so hard to get". They were the only airline applying for the CAN rights.
There were two other carriers (NW and DL, I believe) fighting the slot to China; coming in first place certainly took a bit of convincing the jury on UA's part.
UNITED959 is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 7:14 pm
  #12  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: What I write is my opinion alone..don't read into it anything not written.
Posts: 9,686
Originally Posted by UNITED959
There were two other carriers (NW and DL, I believe) fighting the slot to China; coming in first place certainly took a bit of convincing the jury on UA's part.


UA won that route by default. The other carriers wanted other cities if I recall. Some of the slots had to go to incumbants, and others were open to new entrants.

That isn't to say that UA didn't work the PR networks to get it...one never knows what your competition is going to do, so sometimes you fight hard, when no fight is necessary. I lobbied hard for a girlfriend once...turns out she was intrested in me before I was ever interested in her. I could have saved alot of PR money on flowers and meals had I known the outcome in advance.
fastair is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 7:38 pm
  #13  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SFO/SAN/Ganado Arizona
Programs: Affilated with the orders of I need to rest, doctor's orders!
Posts: 1,400
Originally Posted by fastair
UA won that route by default. The other carriers wanted other cities if I recall. Some of the slots had to go to incumbants, and others were open to new entrants.

That isn't to say that UA didn't work the PR networks to get it...one never knows what your competition is going to do, so sometimes you fight hard, when no fight is necessary. I lobbied hard for a girlfriend once...turns out she was intrested in me before I was ever interested in her. I could have saved alot of PR money on flowers and meals had I known the outcome in advance.
LOL!
hsxagent is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 7:49 pm
  #14  
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Upcountry Maui, HI
Posts: 13,311
Originally Posted by fastair
I lobbied hard for a girlfriend once...turns out she was intrested in me before I was ever interested in her. I could have saved alot of PR money on flowers and meals had I known the outcome in advance.
When the price of flowers and food went up, did you delay your courtship for a year?

-David
LIH Prem is offline  
Old Apr 11, 2008, 8:07 pm
  #15  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: MBS/FNT/LAN
Programs: UA 1K, HH Gold, Mariott Gold
Posts: 9,630
Hmmmm I just tried finishing a dummy booking and all the flights are zeroed out?

Last edited by jhayes_1780; Apr 11, 2008 at 8:13 pm
jhayes_1780 is online now  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.