Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Delta Air Lines | SkyMiles
Reload this Page >

Delta to add Seattle-Osaka, Drops SEA-HKG

Delta to add Seattle-Osaka, Drops SEA-HKG

Old May 26, 2019, 2:19 pm
  #406  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: SEA
Programs: UA Silver, BA Gold, DL Gold
Posts: 9,779
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist
This still doesn't explain why HKG flights are so unprofitable.
Significant TPAC overcapacity explains it pretty well to me.
pbarnette is offline  
Old May 26, 2019, 5:43 pm
  #407  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,594
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist
This still doesn't explain why HKG flights are so unprofitable. CX is a full service carrier and has lower labor costs than USA carriers, but it's certainly not a LCC/ULCC, not are there any doing TPSC from HKG (or nearby airports) AFAIK. Airport fees might be high for HKG but surely not very far out of line with other major airports. HKG is a business market which also has leisure travel, so I would expect at least a signficant fraction of the TPAC seats to/from HKG to sell for high fares. It's a long route, but not compared to other major airports in Asia, so while it's expensive to carry all the fuel for a nonstop, again this wouldn't be way out of line compared to other airports in Asia.

It shows a piece of the pie. The biggest reason HKG is gone is because there is a lot of crap capacity across the pacific right now. United and American are choosing to stay in HKG because they are willing to lose money, Delta's management isn't.
and if you look at the margins/profits for the three you can generally see that Delta is MUCH more conservative.


FWIW I disagree with the conservative nature because I believe HKG is a very important market. Them leaving and CX filling the void on HKG-SEA means they will either have to A) start DTW-HKG back again, a long flight with a low local market B) try to run CX out of Seattle and I'm not sure Delta is willing to lose the money to do that C) bring HKG back from JFK and/or LAX both markets that have a metric s**t ton of capacity to Hong Kong as it is.

Originally Posted by MSPeconomist
It also doesn't seem terribly uncompetitive to offer routing to HKG through NRT (RIP), although slots at HND are constrained and valuable while I'm not sure DL would be allowed to operate intraAsia flights out of partner hub ICN (which also seems farther out of the way than a Tokyo connection).
I'd say there is all of .01% chance of Delta staying at NRT now that they got the slots to move everything to HND. If they do I would expect any tag flights to be SIN/MNL well before HKG and even with that it will still require a XXX-SEA/DTW-NRT-HKG flight that no HVC in their right mind would do. Japan isn't going to give them HND slots for anything that isn't US flights. Part of the reason of this joke of an open skies with Japan was to kill United and Delta's 5th freedom rights and protect JL/ANA.

Delta can operate 5th freedom flying from ICN* because it is an open skies market, but most places they would do so they will just let KE do the flying for them.

*not 100% on China. I would assume they can but their might be something in the US/China/HK bilateral(s) that prevent that. Note, China, including Hong Kong, is not included in DL/KE joint venture due to the US/China Bilateral.
Dawgfan6291 is offline  
Old May 26, 2019, 6:49 pm
  #408  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: PHX
Programs: Delta DM, Marriott Lifetime Titanium, HHonrs Diamond
Posts: 1,336
Originally Posted by Dawgfan6291
FWIW I disagree with the conservative nature because I believe HKG is a very important market.
Delta probably agrees with you. It is important enough to run from any US gateway if they can break even on it or lose a small amount. Not lose $20 million annually. I'm sure they are running the numbers quarterly from all of their gateways and if things change, it will come back.

And considering that UA had to write down the asset value of its routes to HKG substantially, nobody is thinking that profitability on the HKG routes is getting better anytime soon.
FlyBitcoin is offline  
Old May 28, 2019, 8:07 am
  #409  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: TYO / WAS / NYC
Programs: American Express got a hit man lookin' for me
Posts: 4,591
Originally Posted by Dawgfan6291
*not 100% on China. I would assume they can but their might be something in the US/China/HK bilateral(s) that prevent that.
There are limited fifth freedom rights under the US-HK bilateral (historically used by UA to operate HKG-SIN/SGN), but US carriers don't have fifth freedom rights from the mainland except for cargo service.
joejones is offline  
Old May 28, 2019, 8:45 am
  #410  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,334
I'm almost surprised that BA doesn't use HKG as a sort of Asian hub with fifth freedom rights since the Brits basically built and paid for the new HKG airport shortly before the handover. OTOH they do have CX as a oneworld partner, while there isn't a *A or SkyTeam partner with lots of service at HKG. Similarly UA could use fifth freedom rights to operate more intraAsia flights. Also, AFAIK there's no JV between CX and BA, which is a but surprising as coordination would seem to be potentially beneficial, with BA able to deliver lots of connecting passenger from Europe, just as AA could deliver them from the USA to CX.

It's disappointing that fifth freedom doesn't cover mainland China from HKG as CX tends to operate flights to mainland China using affiliate carriers rather than mainline full service CX. Even though it's a logical routing and would avoid the mess at either PVG or PEK (or CAN) one can't easily use HKG as a connection point for destinations within mainland China unless you're willing to transfer to LCCs or limited service affiliate carriers.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old May 28, 2019, 9:32 am
  #411  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Hilton Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: San Antonio
Programs: DL DM, Former AA EXP now AY Plat, AC 75K, NW Plat, Former CO Gold, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 26,954
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist
I'm almost surprised that BA doesn't use HKG as a sort of Asian hub with fifth freedom rights since the Brits basically built and paid for the new HKG airport shortly before the handover. OTOH they do have CX as a oneworld partner, while there isn't a *A or SkyTeam partner with lots of service at HKG. Similarly UA could use fifth freedom rights to operate more intraAsia flights. Also, AFAIK there's no JV between CX and BA, which is a but surprising as coordination would seem to be potentially beneficial, with BA able to deliver lots of connecting passenger from Europe, just as AA could deliver them from the USA to CX.

It's disappointing that fifth freedom doesn't cover mainland China from HKG as CX tends to operate flights to mainland China using affiliate carriers rather than mainline full service CX. Even though it's a logical routing and would avoid the mess at either PVG or PEK (or CAN) one can't easily use HKG as a connection point for destinations within mainland China unless you're willing to transfer to LCCs or limited service affiliate carriers.
I've used CX to connect to mainland China on CX plenty of times. Heck, even able to book CX F the whole way depending on city.
flyerCO is offline  
Old May 28, 2019, 9:34 am
  #412  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: TYO / WAS / NYC
Programs: American Express got a hit man lookin' for me
Posts: 4,591
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist
I'm almost surprised that BA doesn't use HKG as a sort of Asian hub with fifth freedom rights since the Brits basically built and paid for the new HKG airport shortly before the handover. OTOH they do have CX as a oneworld partner, while there isn't a *A or SkyTeam partner with lots of service at HKG. Similarly UA could use fifth freedom rights to operate more intraAsia flights.

Fifth freedom hubs simply don't make as much sense as they used to back in the day when Asian carriers were relatively weak and fewer nonstops were possible. Nowadays US and European carriers generally have much higher cost structures than Asian carriers and are at a marketing disadvantage for local O&D traffic. There's also significant operational hassle in running a hub operation overseas -- you need large numbers of locally-based crew and ground staff to do it. Completely unsurprising to me that UA would rather lean on its regional partner NH for all of this. Can't speak for BA though I think they were looking into similar JV arrangements with certain Asian carriers.

Originally Posted by MSPeconomist
Also, AFAIK there's no JV between CX and BA, which is a but surprising as coordination would seem to be potentially beneficial, with BA able to deliver lots of connecting passenger from Europe, just as AA could deliver them from the USA to CX.
This would result in a de facto monopoly on UK-HK air service, so competition regulators would never approve it.
joejones is offline  
Old May 28, 2019, 11:01 am
  #413  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: EWR
Posts: 2,109
Originally Posted by flyerCO
I've used CX to connect to mainland China on CX plenty of times. Heck, even able to book CX F the whole way depending on city.
CX only flies to PEK and PVG. All other destinations, plus PEK and PVG, (22 total?) are serviced by KA.
MSPeconomist likes this.
steveman518 is offline  
Old May 28, 2019, 11:12 am
  #414  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Hilton Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: San Antonio
Programs: DL DM, Former AA EXP now AY Plat, AC 75K, NW Plat, Former CO Gold, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 26,954
Originally Posted by steveman518
CX only flies to PEK and PVG. All other destinations, plus PEK and PVG, (22 total?) are serviced by KA.
Despite being separate technically, I consider CX and KA to be one and the same. They both offer both business and F, and other thrn the seat there's really no difference. It's not like KA is a LCC or less than full service carrier.
flyerCO is offline  
Old May 28, 2019, 12:19 pm
  #415  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Back in Reds Country (DAY/CVG). Previously: SEA & SAT.
Programs: DL PM 1MM, AA PLAT, UA Silver, Marriott Bonvoy Titanium
Posts: 10,290
<Delete>
ATOBTTR is offline  
Old May 28, 2019, 12:51 pm
  #416  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,334
Originally Posted by flyerCO
Despite being separate technically, I consider CX and KA to be one and the same. They both offer both business and F, and other thrn the seat there's really no difference. It's not like KA is a LCC or less than full service carrier.
To me, they're not at all the same.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old May 28, 2019, 7:51 pm
  #417  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Hilton Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: San Antonio
Programs: DL DM, Former AA EXP now AY Plat, AC 75K, NW Plat, Former CO Gold, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 26,954
Originally Posted by MSPeconomist
To me, they're not at all the same.
Can I ask in what respect you view them as different? (Other then KA use CX J seat for F and KL 777 J style for J)

Fly both regularly and can't really see any other differences.
IndyHoosier likes this.
flyerCO is offline  
Old May 29, 2019, 12:56 am
  #418  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 13,811
Originally Posted by pbarnette
Someone should tell CX that HKG routes are generally profitable.
CX lost money because of being a gambling addict - fuel hedging.

Originally Posted by ClipperDelta
Due to increased costs without sufficient corresponding increases in revenue in the Hong Kong market, the company determined that the value of its Hong Kong routes had been impaired.
It is extremely difficult to know what has exactly happened for UA to have this.

But FWIW, based on this, it did not sound like UA has lost actual money on this route. Instead, UA simply wrote off some book values.

Originally Posted by pbarnette
Significant TPAC overcapacity explains it pretty well to me.
I agree. But the overcapacity are associated with CX.

Originally Posted by flyerCO
Can I ask in what respect you view them as different? (Other then KA use CX J seat for F and KL 777 J style for J)
For starter, when CX decides not to merge the DragonAir brand into Cathay Pacific but rename it to Cathay Dragon, it is, at least, to CX that, they are different.
garykung is offline  
Old May 29, 2019, 2:26 am
  #419  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Hilton Contributor Badge
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: San Antonio
Programs: DL DM, Former AA EXP now AY Plat, AC 75K, NW Plat, Former CO Gold, Hilton Diamond, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 26,954
Originally Posted by garykung
CX lost money because of being a gambling addict - fuel hedging.

...

For starter, when CX decides not to merge the DragonAir brand into Cathay Pacific but rename it to Cathay Dragon, it is, at least, to CX that, they are different.
It likely has to do with separate operating costs. Regardless, this isn't like AF/KL where each has a distinct brand/service from each other. Both CX And Dragon air offer same service. You get same ground and in air service (other than seat type). The only difference seems to be cost/revenue with Dragon optimized for the short/med haul and CX for long to ultra-long haul.
flyerCO is offline  
Old Aug 12, 2019, 6:54 pm
  #420  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,334
In light of the HKG airport closure due to protests (and the fact that continuing unrest could lower demand for travel to HKG), DL's decision to abandon all service to HKG if looking fortunate today.
wrp96 likes this.
MSPeconomist is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.