UA's SFO-TPE is one of their better performing routes actually. CF did an analysis albeit only on 2 months, but it was their 2nd highest LF route after MNL. UA is more likely to axe their South Pacific flying (already a lot of reduction for winter) than TPE being affected.

UA is more of an international airline than Delta is, and SFO has a lot more O&D then SEA.

Not to mention, DL is not codesharing w/ CI and is not selling CI connections out of TPE, or selling DL connections out of SEA.

Spot on there and when I did a look at UA SEA-TPE via SFO you're given two choices evening arrival in TPE UA1102 9:40am SEA to SFO and UA1777 8:40am SEA to SFO to UA871 SFO-TPE. Evening and afternoon versions UA1914/436 to UA853 SFO-TPE arrival early morning in TPE.
Replace TPE with MNL meaning UA1914/436 to UA189 early morning arrival in MNL. Although Filipinos in SEA would rather do BR25 to BR271 or CI21 to CI701 via TPE which puts them at GMT +8 and option 3 PR125 SEA-MNL non-stop flight by avoiding TPE. Not useful for CEB the PR option since it means chaos in MNL which is why they use TPE TW3 BR/CI/JX and ICN KE/OZ to reach CEB from SEA

I'm analyzing this Excel of data just now. Does anyone know why CI is so weak out of JFK? Meanwhile, BR is seemingly much stronger with 5% higher LF and more net volume since BR is daily/more than daily, CI is much less. There should be pretty big O&D demand, and not sure if CI gets DL feed out of JFK, but certainly BR is not getting any feed from UA, given they have 0 flights out of JFK. Perhaps what this signals to me is that BR is generally just the stronger airline between the two.

What will be more interesting is to see the change in LF along the West Coast (YVR, LAX, SFO) from the increaed SEA competition. I don't think much will change in terms of pax count from the other non-West Coast hubs, since they already have direct flights, I don't see them connecting in SEA or double connecting for onward traffic. IAH and ORD are probably very strong for that reason since there's far less TPAC competition. ONT probably doesn't get impacted much bc it's a more regional airport.

I'd also note that while Delta is retiming their flight, the current timing is terrible (as are most of their other TPAC flights out of SEA which are close to noon) for East Coast connections. You're basically only getting the bank of super early morning flights from East Coast along with really tight connections. For example, with the current timing from BOS, there's only one viable same-day connection through SEA at 7am with a sub-hour connection time, everything else is overnight layover. Once the retiming hits, it does enable an extra 11am departure from BOS though.

UA on the other hand is very comfortable w/ codesharing w/ BR and on their own metal, and their schedule is way more competitive as they offer many more viable East Coast connections, well into the evening.

TMK, CI and DL don't cooperate on any sort of "feed" in the US or Asia. If you try to buy xxx-yyy-tpe on BR or CI, you usually get offered flights on anything but UA or DL for the xxx-yyy segment. And, if you're going from the US to somewhere in Asia other than Taiwan, UA and DL steer you towards their JVs.

ETA: I forgot to mention that it's not impossible (not easy, either) to cobble together DL and CI or UA and BR on the same itins when redeeming miles.

We are really talking about three different markets with TPE-US and everyone plays to their strength and try to dominate their own niche.

DL and UA are competing on US originating fares with TPE as end points. If you are in a non-gateway location in the US, you can connect at SFO or SEA without much backtracking. Doesn't make a big difference on timing but FF program may make a difference. DL and UA don't need onward feed at TPE because they are absolutely not interested in chasing those fares.

US gateway O&D are dominated by the Taiwanese carriers except at SFO where UA also has significant O&D market share. In all other gateways, BR, CI and now JX are the preferred (and often only) choice for non-stop flights between US and TPE. And logically, no feed is required for Taiwanese carriers to dominate this market segment. It is by definition O&D only for travel between TPE and LAX/SFO/ONT/SEA/ORD/IAH/JFK.

And finally, US-Southeast Asia market is very fragmented. US airlines don't factor in very much between US and Southeast Asia - if you try to buy a ticket with US3, you end up on their JV partners via NRT or ICN instead of TPE. For Taiwanese carriers, since TPE is only one of many options to connect and they are locked out of US3 JV feed, it means they have to invest in marketing and distribution to generate corporate and VFR sales. BR has been far more active and successful than CI in marketing itself as a connection to Southeast Asia and has carved out a very significant distribution channel presence in both ends (US originating and Southeast Asia originating). This is basically the explanation for why BR has higher load factor at JFK than CI (BR has higher market share for NYC-Southeast Asia than CI).

As to why BR is more successful than CI in the US-Southeast Asia segment, I think it has to do with their respective historical market position in TPE O&D. CI used to dominate the O&D so BR had to get creative. The O&D market is more balanced now but BR still maintain its structural advantage in connecting traffic because of those early marketing and sales channel investments.

Okay, one thing we need to have a clear picture is that:

DL and CI are really not working together bar a few codeshares and Skyteam is just DL's partner and everyone else. DL doesn't need CI's feed beyond TPE and CI doesn't need DL's feed beyond LAX/SFO/ONT/JFK.

UA and BR doesn't even codeshare. You might be able to purchase a ticket with a connection with both carriers, but they don't work together beyond alliance benefits. Same situation for BR/UA as well, they don't need each other's feed beyond the destination they serve.

The only partnership that go beyond as of now may be AS and JX cause they codeshare, but then AS works with everyone even if they don't codeshare.

I think UA has the upper hand cause SFO as a gateway just trumps SEA (in every department). UA can capture the cheapest O/D market to fill the plane without a problem. There just isn't enough O/D there in Seattle for DL.

I think BR is quite price driven in this market in comparison to CI. CI's connecting price isn't as competitive on the South East Asian market. BR rather give the seats to the connecting passengers and charge less but CI maintains the price more average for both markets (Taiwan and beyond Taiwan).

Also, I feel none of the Taiwanese airlines felt the pressure yet cause the flights to India has not been reinstated. If they are not doing well on the existing markets, they would need the Indians. These days we only see the VPs and not I on the Taiwanese carriers.

I feel this also has to do with generations.

Those who first moved to USA, mostly in the bay area north of SFO and flushings in JFK, have passed away (or unable to take flights due to health concerns) the past 10 years. Most of their kids, like some of my friends parents, never really thought CI was that great to begin with when CI operated mostly just outdated 744s on these routes till 2010s or so. BR on the other hand, had newer planes coming in almost 10 years earlier than CI and a more younger feel. FA service wise BR might not be as experienced or good than CI, but is acceptable when you compare to the services you get from the US legacies. Also, BR was one of the few airlines who invented the concept of premium economy and had outstanding performance by putting them at the nose (that captured the younger market who are now 40+). Those were good days for BR and people who fly them. On top of that, once you are with an airline or alliance, it's really difficult to drop to another one unless something really bad happened.

While some of the generations stayed at JFK, most moved sporadically to the north or the south (so if they need to travel back to Taiwan, they don't necessary want to travel to JFK to take the non-stop).

LAX and SJC are more of the second generations that moved in, this is more equal in terms of market share that BR and CI shares. Those who live around SJC goes to SFO regardless cause they don't have a better choice, but those who live in LAX now got ONT as an option as many are no longer in downtown LA (or even San Gabriel Valley for the most part).

Now, with JX coming in, it's just like the new BR with government support back in the days. The only differences is that there is really not much of the pie left to share with JX. Unless CI gets into accidents again, it's hard for the government to take away rights from CI just so JX can get something (or to have a situation in the 1990s to favor BR for competition reasons cause it's already 2 airlines in existence). Also, there's not much of new bilateral to negotiate as most places are already set (and you can't just take away incumbents).

Though, BR's overall services has been a let down since COVID while CI's product has improved. Once CI gets rid of the 333/738s next 2 years, BR actually becomes the oldest airline in terms of plane operations. The game might change a bit as we go.

Spot on there and I wonder if this applicable here SEA/SFO/LAX-TPE-MNL/CEB markets. For that routing SEA/SFO/LAX-TPE-MNL it's down CI/BR taking on PR this is seen as BR11/15 to BR271 and CI7 to CI701 vs PR103 Seattle version is BR25 to BR271 and CI21 to CI701 vs PR125 and SFO BR17/27 to BR271 or CI003 to CI701 vs PR105.

I did a random check on a SEA-MNL ticket and was expecting DL to only offer flights through ICN. Surprisingly, DL is offering TPE, and HND even, as a connecting points, with the onward connections on PR! (I do wonder how that experience would be if PR has IRROPs on the DL ticket stock?)

To the best of my knowledge, Manila is the ONLY onward connection Delta is offering out of TPE (I already brought this up last month).

coolfish1103 thanks for the valuable insights. I wonder for the local Taiwanese, which airline is their "go-to" at the moment? It seems that Starlux (based on my observations on social media and of Taiwanese friends) is the greatest source of pride right now, similar to what SQ is to Singapore or what CX is / was to HK. Is that an accurate comparison?

I can't speak for the general populace, but Starlux has been doing a lot of advertising on TV, and they even have co-branded 7/11 rice balls, which case you don't know 7/11 is a huge brand in Taiwan. So people are definitely more aware of them. I think EVA still dominates though from my anecdotal conversations.

That's a good question and the choices might be the following CI702/704/710 to the DL TPE-ICN/CI022 all skyteam or NH870 to NH118 entirely Star Alliance from a PR delayed MNL-TPE. Do this the opposite way SEA-MNL using the DL/PR example if delayed you'll do it as this way SEA-TPE-MNL CI021/701 SEA-ICN-MNL KE042 to KE621/625/623 SEA-HND-MNL NH117 to NH869. The last one can be rerouted via TPE as BR025 to BR271 or UA SEA-SFO-MNL possibly SQ27 to SQ918 11pm arrival in NAIA T3

It's hard to give you a correct or one straight answer. I don't find the greatest source of pride in either of the three airlines currently serving. While the JX supporters may be the loudest, but the frequent flyers are not at JX... they are at BR (and some in CI)... If you want the most correct answer, it would be the cheapest alternative (the LCCs). I have met enough locals who head out every weekend to Japan, Korea, HK, Macau, Vietnam, Thailand or Philippines and they opt for the cheapest ticket possible.

I used moondog's data and elaborated a little and posted on a thread in Taiwanese BBS called PTT and got lots of hate comments.

K Chang's idea of going for luxury, web buzz, co-branding works for the youngsters. It's one way to gain popularity in a quick span, but there are downsides. These youngsters will help JX for publicity, but that publicity can be good or bad. They might be able to take a flight or two during peak season in the summer, or get some cheap award tickets off Alaska, but they are not going to be the business market that an airline really needs to survive. They don't have the $ for business class and they don't have fly enough frequencies like the wage slave in a company. They also drive some customers away because they feel some passengers are expecting too much from they so-loved airlines (when most are just expecting standards from BR/CI). They tell these customers to shut up on the web. JX has enough pax, you are not needed.

JX wanted to put itself as the Emirates of Taiwan, but there are so many faults and service failures that I don't find it great to be associated with. I do like the idea of having another challenger in the market cause the overall ticket prices should drop, but I am also a very logical person that doesn't go chase stars everyday. I would say they probably captured 50% of the 20-30 year old and 30% of the 30-40 year old? I mean I will have my first flight with them next May on an AS ticketed flight (and a short one), but I am not going out of the way to pay a premium to fly them. Plus, once their new advantage goes away (coming soon in 2026 when CI drops 333/738), it's hard to convince people to not take CI when they are the same price range (and JX's FFP is a disaster).

Yes, JX is a source of pride for it's crazy supporters (especially in Taiwan). It's like a religion for some of them. Nothing can fault JX, we are all sour grapes. I have yet to find these populations outside of Taiwan. Maybe these crazy supporters in Taiwan are hired by Starlux? I have no idea.

My friends who head back once or twice a year from LA have opt for ONT the past couple years. Some of them do fathom the idea of wanting JX to come to ONT, but if JX is not at ONT, they still opt for ONT (so if JX is flying ONT, CI might lose quite some amount of sales). The LA traffic is just a no-no for some of them. They don't want to drive 1-1.5 hours just to be stuck in the horseshoe for another 30 min (especially TBIT is in the center of it, no way of avoiding) and another 1-1.5 hours going back for the driver. My relatives also opt for ONT. They don't head to LAX unless absolutely necessary (going to Europe). It appears that JX is staying at LAX for that second daily, so no ONT in the near future.

However, if there is a significant discount at LAX (or simply just the basic cheap seats are still available there), some people do head to LAX. While the Taiwanese are not that sensitive to prices like the VIPs, they do still care. I still have friends who will take CI 5 or BR 5 because those day time tickets are 50-100 cheaper than the night time flights. ONT only fits the equation cause it saves time and you don't lose a day (cause it's a night flight), but if the cheapest booking is still available at LAX and ONT is 200 more expensive cause the cheapest booking is sold out, they will head to LAX.

I feel the younger Taiwanese in Taiwan don't care as much (or it's being pictured this way). Taiwan bound tickets are more expensive than Foreign stations (at least on the LAX/SFO/SEA destination we have been observing), so it's likely more Taiwanese are buying JX tickets from Taiwan. For the local markets here in the US, JX has been doing lots of promotions to get the passengers, but they can't compete UA in SFO. UA has been and still is the cheapest options for SFO. It seems like they are doing okay at LAX (plus CI isn't doing a fare war atm).

There is also another group, probably my generations, who are now in the 30-40s living in bay area and LA, who will buy the business class ticket directly. Unlike their parents who always opt for the cheapest possible and still fly Economy when they were already 50, these younger Taiwanese are okay with 5k once a year in the summer. They make enough. They are willing to pay. However, if they are paying that premium for the flight, you better deliver. I have some unhappy friends who were screwed by JX because of aircraft rotations and they say they will not fly JX again (I am assuming at least not the coming years or till they get screwed by CI/BR). They gave JX a chance and their time was not valued by JX. They are going back to BR next year.

The buzz JX has gotten reminds a lot of the initial excitement surrounding B6 (JetBlue) thirty years ago (kind of innovative, adopted by savvy folks, too thin to comprise a serious threat to the status quo, novelty factor wore off quickly but cult like status endured longer). The thing is, some of the ideas B6 introduced to the game really were quite good/unique (e.g live TV, generous seat pitch, cheap, low stress airports like LGB). I'm not convinced JX has similar carrots unless you count things like the 7-11 partnership.