Originally Posted by hayzel7773
(Post 30879894)
Cost differences mean yields mean different things to different airlines. What may be profitable for BR does not mean it is for the US3, considering their high cost structure.
UA reported 14.6c stage-adjusted yields for NYC-TPE, higher than HKG and ICN (on 1 stop flight options, so presumably IAD/BOS would be fairly similar). Non-stop service should only be higher. |
Originally Posted by east_west
(Post 30880101)
True, but why not go after higher yield NA markets compared to what has been reported as low-yield BKK. Low cost structure means even more profit.
UA reported 14.6c stage-adjusted yields for NYC-TPE, higher than HKG and ICN (on 1 stop flight options, so presumably IAD/BOS would be fairly similar). Non-stop service should only be higher.
BR, meanwhile, relies on Tier 1 NA cities with large, predominantly Asian populations who want to connect onwards to Asia via TPE. There may be some OD passengers who genuinely want to fly between TPE and NA, but by and large Taiwan's domestic and overseas population alone are not going to be enough to fill planes for some of these markets, particularly for a min 4 weekly frequency to sustain the market. They need the transit traffic. Currently they have most of the Tier 1 cities covered. 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. |
Originally Posted by someone0000
(Post 30880953)
This isn't quite an apples to apples comparison as UA's target market are passengers either:
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. |
Europe-BKK has good yields but that doesn't mean US-BKK will have good yields because definition of good yield is relative to operating costs. Europe-BKK is roughly 5,000 nautical miles while US West Coast to BKK is over 7,000 nautical miles. You need much higher average fare for US-BKK to justify non-stop flights.
BOS or IAD to Asia is potentially good market for BR but east-west is probably right about equipment for cargo. I think BOS is a little saturated right now with JL, CX, HU. BR can take a wait and see approach. Another one that people like to talk about is SJC-TPE. 77W definitely won't work on that route due to airport restrictions. |
Originally Posted by east_west
(Post 30881307)
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. |
Originally Posted by bzcat
(Post 30878455)
North America expansion is on hold because of competition basically...
Personally I am highly skeptical that SEA has enough trans-Pacific passengers to support all these airlines. But it is nice to now finally have good representation of OneWorld to Asia. Until now we've had none, now we'll have 2. |
Originally Posted by tai4de2
(Post 30892941)
Doesn't seem to have stopped BR expanding Seattle service... SEA gets JL, CX, and SQ this year, and BR still expanded SEA from 7x to 10x weekly.
Personally I am highly skeptical that SEA has enough trans-Pacific passengers to support all these airlines. But it is nice to now finally have good representation of OneWorld to Asia. Until now we've had none, now we'll have 2. |
Originally Posted by someone0000
(Post 30876498)
Reported in Taiwan's Economic Daily News today:
Originally Posted by flyingeverywhere1
(Post 30877372)
I'm kind of surprised that they start to focus on growing in Europe before some U.S. cities! Still remembering a few year ago EVA was talking about expanding to BOS, IAD in North America.. Does EVA even have right to operate route to Germany?
With Europe transitions to 789.. Wonder where they will put their 777s.. The only long haul expansion with 777 now is 3x weekly SEA for now. But good news for EVA and TPE for getting some new destinations! |
Originally Posted by someone0000
(Post 30879159)
A big assumption to all this is that the new service will be a nonstop TPE-MXP flight, which the article does not say. If it's a fifth freedom flight via BKK then it will capture effectively all of the above categories, noting that if it operates as a day flight from TPE and an evening flight back:
|
Originally Posted by iamamadscientist
(Post 30893510)
Good news, will use BR to BNE in Nov/Dec 2019.
What about the remaining European routes? With four frames they are getting less than a handul of 789. Wasn't it AMS and VIE so far only? |
Just some random thoughts.. Is it likely that BR partners more extensively with other carriers in the NA? Seems like UA/AC are not very keen. I always feel that partnering with AS would work well with BR. Don't know if it is BR who is unwilling or AS... For now you can purchase tickets to secondary NA cites with connections to AS, but that's about it. Or BR can even partner with B6. I think SQ partners with both of them..
|
Originally Posted by flyingeverywhere1
(Post 30951566)
Just some random thoughts.. Is it likely that BR partners more extensively with other carriers in the NA? Seems like UA/AC are not very keen. I always feel that partnering with AS would work well with BR. Don't know if it is BR who is unwilling or AS... For now you can purchase tickets to secondary NA cites with connections to AS, but that's about it. Or BR can even partner with B6. I think SQ partners with both of them..
|
Originally Posted by flyingeverywhere1
(Post 30951566)
Just some random thoughts.. Is it likely that BR partners more extensively with other carriers in the NA? Seems like UA/AC are not very keen. I always feel that partnering with AS would work well with BR. Don't know if it is BR who is unwilling or AS... For now you can purchase tickets to secondary NA cites with connections to AS, but that's about it. Or BR can even partner with B6. I think SQ partners with both of them..
Also, quite clearly UA and BR are very much competitors. UA is the only US carrier with their own metal to TPE. This is much like UA and SQ. |
Originally Posted by flyingeverywhere1
(Post 30951566)
Or BR can even partner with B6.
|
777 will remain on the AMS route, so no 787 anymore for the summer.
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 1:54 am. |
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.