EVA Air New Routes
Dec 14, 2017, 9:50 pm
#17
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: SFO
Programs: BR Diamond, Dynasty Flyer Paragon, Marriott Lifetime Plat
Posts: 1,926
Another part of the reason why their were no routes was because of the fleet. The 777 cannot be sustained on many routes because of its rather high seat count(and large PE cabin)/not as fuel efficient and the A333 can't make it to places in Europe. The lack of a plane in between(787/A359) essentially left EVA with planes that could only be sent to existing destinations as additional frequencies(hence the failed SEA tack on, the adjustments of the LAX flight, new SFO flight, JFK morning flight, 777 to Ho Chi Minh CIty 2-3x a day, double daily 777 to SIN).
As stated above, the rumors milling around the company are Sydney, Hawaii, Auckland, and many more. Europe/Oceania is currently EVAs focus because of CI's strong Europe performance. They see it as another "N.A. to S.E.A" campaign for them. It was rumored last year that BCN, MAD, and MXP were all on EVA's target list because of visits by high level mgmt. Stockholm/Copenhagen could be another, EVA recently dispatched a team to Copenhagen and held a travel agents event there.
There is one new route next year that is confirmed, and that is TPE-VIE nonstop.
And instead of 1, EVA will be getting 2-4 789s next year, depending upon ALC slots!
Last edited by hayzel7773; Dec 14, 2017 at 10:03 pm
Dec 14, 2017, 10:43 pm
#18
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 352
2017 was a year full of cancellations and reductions because of poor performance on mainland-china/poor Q1/2 showings/lack of deliveries(A333 replacing A332 fleet, 777 replacing returned aircraft+a332 lost). Perhaps, with the super strong Q3 and Q4 showings and the beginning of 787 deliveries, we will see new additions be added.
Another part of the reason why their were no routes was because of the fleet. The 777 cannot be sustained on many routes because of its rather high seat count(and large PE cabin)/not as fuel efficient and the A333 can't make it to places in Europe. The lack of a plane in between(787/A359) essentially left EVA with planes that could only be sent to existing destinations as additional frequencies(hence the failed SEA tack on, the adjustments of the LAX flight, new SFO flight, JFK morning flight, 777 to Ho Chi Minh CIty 2-3x a day, double daily 777 to SIN).
As stated above, the rumors milling around the company are Sydney, Hawaii, Auckland, and many more. Europe/Oceania is currently EVAs focus because of CI's strong Europe performance. They see it as another "N.A. to S.E.A" campaign for them. It was rumored last year that BCN, MAD, and MXP were all on EVA's target list because of visits by high level mgmt. Stockholm/Copenhagen could be another, EVA recently dispatched a team to Copenhagen and held a travel agents event there.
There is one new route next year that is confirmed, and that is TPE-VIE nonstop.
And instead of 1, EVA will be getting 2-4 789s next year, depending upon ALC slots!
Another part of the reason why their were no routes was because of the fleet. The 777 cannot be sustained on many routes because of its rather high seat count(and large PE cabin)/not as fuel efficient and the A333 can't make it to places in Europe. The lack of a plane in between(787/A359) essentially left EVA with planes that could only be sent to existing destinations as additional frequencies(hence the failed SEA tack on, the adjustments of the LAX flight, new SFO flight, JFK morning flight, 777 to Ho Chi Minh CIty 2-3x a day, double daily 777 to SIN).
As stated above, the rumors milling around the company are Sydney, Hawaii, Auckland, and many more. Europe/Oceania is currently EVAs focus because of CI's strong Europe performance. They see it as another "N.A. to S.E.A" campaign for them. It was rumored last year that BCN, MAD, and MXP were all on EVA's target list because of visits by high level mgmt. Stockholm/Copenhagen could be another, EVA recently dispatched a team to Copenhagen and held a travel agents event there.
There is one new route next year that is confirmed, and that is TPE-VIE nonstop.
And instead of 1, EVA will be getting 2-4 789s next year, depending upon ALC slots!
Also hard to imagine there is a market for these 2nd tier European cities when there isn't even daily TPE-London service.
Dec 14, 2017, 10:52 pm
#19
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: SFO
Programs: BR Diamond, Dynasty Flyer Paragon, Marriott Lifetime Plat
Posts: 1,926
Just curious -- Europe to SE Asia seems dominated by ME3, no? Does BR really expect to compete? TPE has geographical advantages from the US west coast, but definitely not Europe to SE Asia.
Also hard to imagine there is a market for these 2nd tier European cities when there isn't even daily TPE-London service.
Also hard to imagine there is a market for these 2nd tier European cities when there isn't even daily TPE-London service.
TPE-LON is supposed to go daily next year(according to CI's VP).
Last edited by hayzel7773; Dec 14, 2017 at 11:01 pm
Dec 15, 2017, 2:17 am
#20
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 57
2017 was a year full of cancellations and reductions because of poor performance on mainland-china/poor Q1/2 showings/lack of deliveries(A333 replacing A332 fleet, 777 replacing returned aircraft+a332 lost). Perhaps, with the super strong Q3 and Q4 showings and the beginning of 787 deliveries, we will see new additions be added.
Another part of the reason why their were no routes was because of the fleet. The 777 cannot be sustained on many routes because of its rather high seat count(and large PE cabin)/not as fuel efficient and the A333 can't make it to places in Europe. The lack of a plane in between(787/A359) essentially left EVA with planes that could only be sent to existing destinations as additional frequencies(hence the failed SEA tack on, the adjustments of the LAX flight, new SFO flight, JFK morning flight, 777 to Ho Chi Minh CIty 2-3x a day, double daily 777 to SIN).
As stated above, the rumors milling around the company are Sydney, Hawaii, Auckland, and many more. Europe/Oceania is currently EVAs focus because of CI's strong Europe performance. They see it as another "N.A. to S.E.A" campaign for them. It was rumored last year that BCN, MAD, and MXP were all on EVA's target list because of visits by high level mgmt. Stockholm/Copenhagen could be another, EVA recently dispatched a team to Copenhagen and held a travel agents event there.
There is one new route next year that is confirmed, and that is TPE-VIE nonstop.
And instead of 1, EVA will be getting 2-4 789s next year, depending upon ALC slots!
Another part of the reason why their were no routes was because of the fleet. The 777 cannot be sustained on many routes because of its rather high seat count(and large PE cabin)/not as fuel efficient and the A333 can't make it to places in Europe. The lack of a plane in between(787/A359) essentially left EVA with planes that could only be sent to existing destinations as additional frequencies(hence the failed SEA tack on, the adjustments of the LAX flight, new SFO flight, JFK morning flight, 777 to Ho Chi Minh CIty 2-3x a day, double daily 777 to SIN).
As stated above, the rumors milling around the company are Sydney, Hawaii, Auckland, and many more. Europe/Oceania is currently EVAs focus because of CI's strong Europe performance. They see it as another "N.A. to S.E.A" campaign for them. It was rumored last year that BCN, MAD, and MXP were all on EVA's target list because of visits by high level mgmt. Stockholm/Copenhagen could be another, EVA recently dispatched a team to Copenhagen and held a travel agents event there.
There is one new route next year that is confirmed, and that is TPE-VIE nonstop.
And instead of 1, EVA will be getting 2-4 789s next year, depending upon ALC slots!
Dec 15, 2017, 4:37 am
#21
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: CAN, LAX, TPE
Programs: AA, AS, CI, DL, UA
Posts: 2,894
There is also no reason to boost Vienna if Munich is available. EVA is upping Vienna to semi-daily (some via BKK) and Vienna has always been an alternative should Munich been available.
Dec 15, 2017, 4:48 pm
#22
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 352
787-10 should have range for Europe, Asia, Oceania, and SEA/YVR, but probably not elsewhere in NA.
That leaves under-served long/thin routes in NA -- perhaps IAD/DFW/BOS/ATL/SAN? Each 787-9 frame could potentially support 3-4x a week service, so maybe four frames is enough.
Dec 16, 2017, 4:37 am
#25
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: CAN, LAX, TPE
Programs: AA, AS, CI, DL, UA
Posts: 2,894
I'm also curious about plans for the four 787-9s, as BR also has 20 787-10 orders in place plus 6 options.
787-10 should have range for Europe, Asia, Oceania, and SEA/YVR, but probably not elsewhere in NA.
That leaves under-served long/thin routes in NA -- perhaps IAD/DFW/BOS/ATL/SAN? Each 787-9 frame could potentially support 3-4x a week service, so maybe four frames is enough.
787-10 should have range for Europe, Asia, Oceania, and SEA/YVR, but probably not elsewhere in NA.
That leaves under-served long/thin routes in NA -- perhaps IAD/DFW/BOS/ATL/SAN? Each 787-9 frame could potentially support 3-4x a week service, so maybe four frames is enough.
However, looking at recent performances, I believe EVA has problems filling those extra 77Ws K got and they have to adopt them to all routes possible (hence all those increases, and the next one to try is VIE). Those that cannot sustain will be cut (IST), reduced (SEA) or maybe have the 787-9 put them (such as ORD) on stabilizer and see if it works.
Dec 16, 2017, 8:41 am
#26
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,963
I thought the 787-9 were for thin routes like Brisbane and Vienna, maybe also start San Jose (which 77W cannot land) or Sydney.
However, looking at recent performances, I believe EVA has problems filling those extra 77Ws K got and they have to adopt them to all routes possible (hence all those increases, and the next one to try is VIE). Those that cannot sustain will be cut (IST), reduced (SEA) or maybe have the 787-9 put them (such as ORD) on stabilizer and see if it works.
However, looking at recent performances, I believe EVA has problems filling those extra 77Ws K got and they have to adopt them to all routes possible (hence all those increases, and the next one to try is VIE). Those that cannot sustain will be cut (IST), reduced (SEA) or maybe have the 787-9 put them (such as ORD) on stabilizer and see if it works.
Hopefully they don't get/convert more 77Ws that are 10-across if they can't fill the seats already.
Dec 16, 2017, 9:25 am
#27
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 352
Dec 16, 2017, 12:33 pm
#28
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: CAN, LAX, TPE
Programs: AA, AS, CI, DL, UA
Posts: 2,894
Compare to the ambitions that K had when he was operating EVA, what the current management did was to replace existing aircrafts with the new ones. However, the amount of 77W fleet EVA owns is still quite some, so new routes and/or frequencies to existing destinations are to be expected. I mean when EVA slashes JFK to 10 weekly and SEA back to daily, the added capacity had to go somewhere. As of now it's going to SFO and next year to VIE, so we will see how they do clashing against CI on both routes. The YYZ damage did not even cost their operations to change, so one can see how flexible the current EVA fleet offers. They are still able to add more flights.
Cargo is doing quite well. The fun part is, couple years ago EVA almost dropped cargo to just belly loads.
I think the 787-9s are good additions to the EVA fleet, just not enough. I am unsure what the 787-10 is there for, though. The range it has cannot operate most NA routes (except SEA, YVR) so not all the 77Ws can be replaced. It may help on some of the European routes (AMS), but not sure if EVA needs 20 for just these flights. Yes, the 787-10 can be used on Oceania and regional as well to replace the 333 (which is still quite young for EVA in terms of usage), but that will also clash into 321 operations (which will hurt cause the mainland China operations are not doing so well and that's where majorities of the 321 were originally intended to operate). The 787s will not affect EVA until they arrive and is in operation, so we will see how EVA makes it work.
This year is a pretty good year for most airlines (as long as you don't fuel hedge the wrong way). EVA has finally passed CAL in the Pax revenue department, though the yield (not as important) is not very good. We will see how it goes. The revenue department is closing in to 2012 level in terms of percentage and now both have comparable figures.
Last edited by coolfish1103; Dec 16, 2017 at 12:47 pm
Dec 16, 2017, 1:05 pm
#29
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: SFO
Programs: BR Diamond, Dynasty Flyer Paragon, Marriott Lifetime Plat
Posts: 1,926
Dec 19, 2017, 2:57 am
#30
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 57
Well, filling extra 77Ws on routes is different than adding a seat into a row. You are only adding about ~30 seats to a daily flight (~210 seats) which allows you to sell more cheap seats in comparison to adding 330+ seats per extra flight operated. Plus one doesn't usually add just a flight, it's at least 3-4 weekly. That's totally different operations (extra ground staff, additional catering etc.) and sales (more pax at different targeting hours) needing to be met.
Compare to the ambitions that K had when he was operating EVA, what the current management did was to replace existing aircrafts with the new ones. However, the amount of 77W fleet EVA owns is still quite some, so new routes and/or frequencies to existing destinations are to be expected. I mean when EVA slashes JFK to 10 weekly and SEA back to daily, the added capacity had to go somewhere. As of now it's going to SFO and next year to VIE, so we will see how they do clashing against CI on both routes. The YYZ damage did not even cost their operations to change, so one can see how flexible the current EVA fleet offers. They are still able to add more flights.
Cargo is doing quite well. The fun part is, couple years ago EVA almost dropped cargo to just belly loads.
I think the 787-9s are good additions to the EVA fleet, just not enough. I am unsure what the 787-10 is there for, though. The range it has cannot operate most NA routes (except SEA, YVR) so not all the 77Ws can be replaced. It may help on some of the European routes (AMS), but not sure if EVA needs 20 for just these flights. Yes, the 787-10 can be used on Oceania and regional as well to replace the 333 (which is still quite young for EVA in terms of usage), but that will also clash into 321 operations (which will hurt cause the mainland China operations are not doing so well and that's where majorities of the 321 were originally intended to operate). The 787s will not affect EVA until they arrive and is in operation, so we will see how EVA makes it work.
This year is a pretty good year for most airlines (as long as you don't fuel hedge the wrong way). EVA has finally passed CAL in the Pax revenue department, though the yield (not as important) is not very good. We will see how it goes. The revenue department is closing in to 2012 level in terms of percentage and now both have comparable figures.
Compare to the ambitions that K had when he was operating EVA, what the current management did was to replace existing aircrafts with the new ones. However, the amount of 77W fleet EVA owns is still quite some, so new routes and/or frequencies to existing destinations are to be expected. I mean when EVA slashes JFK to 10 weekly and SEA back to daily, the added capacity had to go somewhere. As of now it's going to SFO and next year to VIE, so we will see how they do clashing against CI on both routes. The YYZ damage did not even cost their operations to change, so one can see how flexible the current EVA fleet offers. They are still able to add more flights.
Cargo is doing quite well. The fun part is, couple years ago EVA almost dropped cargo to just belly loads.
I think the 787-9s are good additions to the EVA fleet, just not enough. I am unsure what the 787-10 is there for, though. The range it has cannot operate most NA routes (except SEA, YVR) so not all the 77Ws can be replaced. It may help on some of the European routes (AMS), but not sure if EVA needs 20 for just these flights. Yes, the 787-10 can be used on Oceania and regional as well to replace the 333 (which is still quite young for EVA in terms of usage), but that will also clash into 321 operations (which will hurt cause the mainland China operations are not doing so well and that's where majorities of the 321 were originally intended to operate). The 787s will not affect EVA until they arrive and is in operation, so we will see how EVA makes it work.
This year is a pretty good year for most airlines (as long as you don't fuel hedge the wrong way). EVA has finally passed CAL in the Pax revenue department, though the yield (not as important) is not very good. We will see how it goes. The revenue department is closing in to 2012 level in terms of percentage and now both have comparable figures.
