Old Mar 13, 19, 7:59 am
  #48  
east_west
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 350
Originally Posted by someone0000 View Post
This isn't quite an apples to apples comparison as UA's target market are passengers either:
  • Flying to TPE only from SFO, vice versa
  • Connecting via SFO to fly to TPE, vice versa. They can draw passengers from basically any of the domestic ports UA flies to
Further, there could be cargo considerations at play which makes the yield for MXP overall higher than a new NA city. Flying to the US East Coast would probably create load restrictions which severely limit their ability to carry higher yielding cargo.
I'm making two, distinct, arguments. I believe these arguments apply to both BOS/IAD, but PHL is close enough to JFK that it would be hard to make it work.
1) UA has revealed relatively high-yield for the 1-stop NYC-TPE OD market, even in the presence of BR/CI non-stops and multiple other 1-stop options. There was discussion on the UA board about how TPE is probably in line for the next EWR TPAC ahead of ICN. IAD/BOS have similar demographics/affluence and are #6 and #10 in metro population, similar to Toronto.
2) BOS/IAD is bursting at the seams on TPAC, see the 90+ load factors on CX and JL, indicating a substantial amount of connecting traffic.

On the other hand, I do think these routes would be best served by 789s rather than 777s, and this would limit cargo. But routing cargo via BKK doesn't seem to be optimal from a cost point of view.
east_west is offline