Originally Posted by J.Edward
UA used to offer HKG-LAX flight but pulled it due to lack of demand. Moreover, CA offers two non-stops between the markets. Secondly, does CO have the rights to fly to LGW from LAX? If they do, they'll have to compete against multiple flights from VS, BA, AA and UA.
On some days, I have actually found three daily CA departures from LAX.
Originally Posted by J.Edward
You
think it spends to much time in HKG?
Did it ever cross your mind that perhaps this is when CO sends the birds off for the MX? Just because the plane is not in the air does not mean it is sitting on a lonely tarmac somewhere waiting to gorge itself on passengers again.
It certainly is possible that some maintenance work is performed in HKG. There is still a lot of dead time on the ground, considering that the carrier has so few B777's.
Originally Posted by J.Edward
Those 777's - and to a lesser extent 787's - are expensive machines to hurl through the air. Perhaps one reason they sit for so long at HKG (or PEK, EZE, GIG, etc.) is that any incremental revenue gained through more service would not offset the incremental cost associated with operating the flight (to say nothing of performing MX or possessing the necessary rights to operate the flight). The reason there's no hub/gateway at LAX is the same reason there's none at GUM: it's just not believed to be economically viable by the current administration.
Every business should be driven by the bottom line. Continental could improve it's equipment utilization. The number isn't low, but it could be ratched it. In any event, CO isn't going to have a choice. If the carrier continues to grow at the current clip (all else being equal), it's going to have to either start a new hub or create mini-hubs somewhere else in the country. To some extent, it's already started to do the latter in LAX with flights to Mexico and seasonally to Colorado.