Originally Posted by
williambruno1975
im really curious as to the local market loyalty and/or corporate contract demands that DL deem MNL to be crucial enough to continue being flown by its own metal, but a global city like Hong Kong can be fanned out to the JV. Microsoft is the first major corporation I can think of directly impacted by this, since they have a non-trivia division in HKG that have travel needs back to the mothership on a consistent basis. Don’t really know what the scenario is over at Amazon.
Microsoft does have operations in HKG, as in most major cities - but to the best of my knowledge, their main Asia Pacific corporate presence is in Singapore. Traffic to HKG would largely be from hardware engineering folks intending to visit factories and partners in Shenzhen, and the Xiamen flight will cover that traffic perfectly fine. I actually think Microsoft would be more impacted by the loss of connectivity to Taipei, where many computer manufacturers are located, than by the loss of an HKG direct. (I assume they just use the EVA Air flight instead for TPE, though.)
Originally Posted by
williambruno1975
maybe im too millennial to grasp ... WHAT competition ?
1. DL has had a monopoly on the route the whole time. CX or Hong Kong Air didn’t jump in.
4. The YVR factor is rather thin at this point. The offline leakage is minimal considering it’s a 3 hour drive plus a land border crossing. A sizable collection of Airlines serve both.
I can really see CX or HX launching HKG-SEA to backfill. Ditto for ANA backfilling the, in my viewpoint, inevitable switch of PDX-NRT over to PDX-ICN.
As for competition, YVR is only 45 minute away by air, and as has been discussed, the YVR-HKG market is absolutely saturated with at least four daily direct flights across three airlines. CX and HX both partner wtih Alaska for SEA-YVR, and AC of course operates their own; all of those airlines file competitive fares in the SEA-HKG market. The connecting flight is so short it is a non-issue for most O&D passengers from Seattle.