|
Originally Posted by CX828
(Post 26031373)
If this gets confirmed it will be interesting to see what happens to CX.
AA will fill the plane very profitably with AA flyers no problem. I still think lots of the Asian community in LA, and corporates based in LA who frequent HKG, along with transfer traffic beyond HKG will still prefer CX. However CX will stand to lose some of the premium AA traffic as well as connections beyond LAX. There is room for both players, I just hope CX can maintain 4x daily. In a broader term, I do hope one day that there can be an open skies between HKG and USA to allow CX to join the JL/AA JV. It would allow CX and AA to become true partners across the Pacific and a move like this would not be seen as a threat or a competitor. (though, for TPAC, at least there are CA/MU/CZ to keep CX fares in line. Even then, I am willing, and do, pay higher fares for CX over the said 3 mainland Chinese carriers.) |
Originally Posted by CX828
(Post 26031373)
I still think lots of the Asian community in LA, and corporates based in LA who frequent HKG, along with transfer traffic beyond HKG will still prefer CX.
|
Originally Posted by AA_EXP09
(Post 26032093)
JVs are so good, that they have resulted only in 'capacity discipline' and higher fares across the Atlantic. What makes you think that having less competition is any good?
(though, for TPAC, at least there are CA/MU/CZ to keep CX fares in line. Even then, I am willing, and do, pay higher fares for CX over the said 3 mainland Chinese carriers.) |
They can benefit passengers in non-monetary. Frequency increase; increased non stop destinations on same alliance therefore ability to use your frequent flier perks in more ways... etc.
|
http://viewfromthewing.boardingarea....able-march-20/
Route has been confirmed, and is a JV route with Japan Airlines, and not Cathay. So hopefully some price competition here. |
Here's some direct info from AA: http://hub.aa.com/en/nr/american-air...s-to-hong-kong
Start Date: Sept. 7 Schedule: LAX-HKG Departs LAX at 1:55 a.m. Arrives at HKG at 8:10 a.m. (next day) (Subject to regulatory approval) HKG-LAX Departs HKG at 8:20 p.m. Arrives at LAX at 6:40 p.m. |
I just did a search on current fares on AA HKG-LAX via Tokyo and the cheapest restricted fare is around $31k HKD. The cheapest CX fare is $48k.
Given it is a JL JV route, I expect this will be the pricing. Booking available from 20 March. |
Originally Posted by sxc
(Post 26304726)
http://viewfromthewing.boardingarea....able-march-20/
Route has been confirmed, and is a JV route with Japan Airlines, and not Cathay. So hopefully some price competition here. |
Originally Posted by sxc
(Post 26304726)
Route has been confirmed, and is a JV route with Japan Airlines, and not Cathay. So hopefully some price competition here.
It should be interesting to see if J fare will also be cheaper. From what AA is saying about DFW-HKG, it shouldn't have any problem filling in J with its corporate flyers. Talking about J, does this mean we can expect better availability for redemption/upgrade? I mean with AA corporate flyers migrating to AA metal + changes with AA FFP in terms of earnings and redemption, this should be a plus for MPC members? |
Originally Posted by ChrisLi
(Post 26312423)
As AA now reveal they are launching LAX-HKG the reduction now makes sense, as more AA-flyer will now change to the AA metal flight for SWU and Main Cabin Extra, and price for the code share flight may increased accordingly as well.
I'd be happy to give a AA a try for sure given the significant price diff, literally the same seat, got wifi onboard, and probably a slightly better catering! Bring on the competition I'd say, CX needs to wake up! |
Originally Posted by HKGglobaltrotter
(Post 26358334)
One can now make reservations on the HKG-LAX service. I just did a dummy booking (roundtrip J fare ex-HKG to LAX in mid Oct)...wow it only costs $30,854 HKD. That's roughly $3,900 USD. This is significantly lower than CX J ex-HKG fare. For the exact same dates CX is charging $51,144 HKD (or $6,600 USD).
I'd be happy to give a AA a try for sure given the significant price diff, literally the same seat, got wifi onboard, and probably a slightly better catering! Bring on the competition I'd say, CX needs to wake up! |
Originally Posted by HKGglobaltrotter
(Post 26358334)
One can now make reservations on the HKG-LAX service. I just did a dummy booking (roundtrip J fare ex-HKG to LAX in mid Oct)...wow it only costs $30,854 HKD. That's roughly $3,900 USD. This is significantly lower than CX J ex-HKG fare. For the exact same dates CX is charging $51,144 HKD (or $6,600 USD).
I'd be happy to give a AA a try for sure given the significant price diff, literally the same seat, got wifi onboard, and probably a slightly better catering! Bring on the competition I'd say, CX needs to wake up! |
Originally Posted by HKGglobaltrotter
(Post 26358334)
One can now make reservations on the HKG-LAX service. I just did a dummy booking (roundtrip J fare ex-HKG to LAX in mid Oct)...wow it only costs $30,854 HKD. That's roughly $3,900 USD. This is significantly lower than CX J ex-HKG fare. For the exact same dates CX is charging $51,144 HKD (or $6,600 USD).
I'd be happy to give a AA a try for sure given the significant price diff, literally the same seat, got wifi onboard, and probably a slightly better catering! Bring on the competition I'd say, CX needs to wake up! |
Originally Posted by KACommuter
(Post 26362323)
That's a huge price difference for a very similar product - both non-stops, and if AA deploys their 777 with the same J layout as CX, I will try this next trip to LA.
|
Originally Posted by Rivarix
(Post 26310700)
I'd expect the price in Y to be cheaper than CX.
Reason? Miles and Upgrade (eVIP by EXP).
Originally Posted by Rivarix
(Post 26310700)
From what AA is saying about DFW-HKG, it shouldn't have any problem filling in J with its corporate flyers.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 9:15 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.