SFO-AKL JV w/NZ, all year UA metal, 77W Nov18-Mar19, 772 Apr19-Oct19 (+newORD-AKL NZ)
|
|||
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Programs: UA Premier Platinum, DL Platinum Medallion
Posts: 442
SFO-AKL JV w/NZ, all year UA metal, 77W Nov18-Mar19, 772 Apr19-Oct19 (+newORD-AKL NZ)
#3
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: GVA (Greater Vancouver Area)
Programs: DREAD Gold; UA 1.021MM; Bonvoy Au-197; PCC Elite+; CWC Au-197; CCC Elite*; WoH Dis
Posts: 50,039
That's what United will decide.
Where did you hear that? I'm sure some go to Europe, but I'm sure lots visit North America, too. And San Francisco is a great destination.
Where did you hear that? I'm sure some go to Europe, but I'm sure lots visit North America, too. And San Francisco is a great destination.
#4
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: SEA, DUD, GLA
Programs: NZ Elite (*G)
Posts: 520
I would amend your final sentence to ask why anyone would want to fly UA over NZ, full stop.
#6
#8
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: ONT, LAX
Programs: UA1k 2.5MM, AA Plt, peasant on everybody else, elite something or other at a bunch of hotels.
Posts: 4,527
UA flew LAX-AKL "back in the day." I doubt the route was a great money maker, but they did keep at it for a number of years. As far as Y pax are concerned, I could see people preferring UA in Y with present seating vs. NZ 10 across in Y on some of their 777's. UA's C service leaves a great deal to be desired, so little competition there. (Although I prefer UA's C seat over NZ.)
#9
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: if it's Thursday, this must be Belgium
Programs: UA 1K MM
Posts: 6,210
It would be nice, but I would bet it's a close call whether there's enough traffic to support it. NZ is a country of just 4M people. Not that many are coming here from NZ, and not that many people are going there for tourism. It's also not a huge regional financial hub either.
#11
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chicago: ORD, MDW
Programs: United Million Mile Flyer, Hilton Silver, Marriott Gold, DL, AA WN
Posts: 500
#13
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: home since March
Programs: BA Meltdown soft-landed Silver, OZ♦+ (BR/UA), B6 Mosaic, WoH♦, Mlife Noir, TR 7*
Posts: 5,723
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: MEL CHC
Posts: 16,903
Both UA & QF used to fly LAX-AKL. If they had made good money they would still be flying that route.
QF was MEL-AKL-LAX with a B747 then A330 IIRC until mid 90's.
If a new service would not a lot paying pax in the pointy end IMHO
AA would have a very limited NZ domestic partner:- Qantas lcc subsidiary Jetstar.
UA would be head to head with Air NZ, and then reply on Air NZ for domestic flight connection.
QF was MEL-AKL-LAX with a B747 then A330 IIRC until mid 90's.
If a new service would not a lot paying pax in the pointy end IMHO
AA would have a very limited NZ domestic partner:- Qantas lcc subsidiary Jetstar.
UA would be head to head with Air NZ, and then reply on Air NZ for domestic flight connection.
#15
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,790
It would be nice, but I would bet it's a close call whether there's enough traffic to support it. NZ is a country of just 4M people. Not that many are coming here from NZ, and not that many people are going there for tourism. It's also not a huge regional financial hub either.
http://www.med.govt.nz/sectors-indus...l/iva-key-data
http://travel.trade.gov/view/m-2013-I-001/index.html
Not huge, but a growing market and right now, NZ has a monopoly on nonstop flights.