Originally Posted by
Letitride3c
Originally Posted by
cxfan1960
Do you mean AA? They may just as well turn the business over to CX and just do code-share.
Exactly what I was thinking - AA and CX code-sharing with each other ... (Going east to west) I would hate to fly SFO/LAX to HNL on narrow-bodies and then switch to a 777's for a direct flight or deplane while more pax get onboard during the layover. Alias, I'm sure they will figure out the logistics & who has what in their fleet, etc. etc.
Originally Posted by
CrazyJ82
: I think the biggest likely impact would be on potential leisure routes, so as I think about it I wonder whether CX really will see a huge effect.
The other major consideration for the carrier(S) on this potential new route, assuming that there are no landing rights issues, which I'm clueless on - is how much cargo is going to be on them? Is there enough to fly the birds daily and run a profit, especially in the "front" of the bus paying a hefty premium instead of mostly upgrades?
The VWP would open up all 50 states to folks qualifying from HK, from my additional reading on the proposed legislative amendment to the main Senate bill this year - I'm not so sure some of the other states are as gung ho on this matter as Hawaii. Here in the NY area, the premium outlets are welcoming the "mainlanders" with seemingly unlimited cash to buy until they ran out of space in their new suitcases purchased on the spot
VWP is totally unrelated to cargo clearance. So to the (considerable) extent cargo loads factor into cx route planning, that's already accounted for before any VWP change.