SFO-XIY (Xi'an, China) summer seasonal service discontinued {will not return in 2018}
Dec 10, 2017, 7:21 am
#46
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MRY - CNX - TXL
Programs: UA 1K / *G / Marriott PE / Expedia Gold+ / Hertz PC
Posts: 7,058
Wasn't there part of the IFE commercials during Smisek a few years ago where they tout how UA has the most coverage to the "interior of China"?
Maybe in forgoing that they'll start the new long and thin routes that bypass the old need for 5th freedom/connections. With SIN they showed they're willing to play ball.
Maybe in forgoing that they'll start the new long and thin routes that bypass the old need for 5th freedom/connections. With SIN they showed they're willing to play ball.
Dec 10, 2017, 7:46 am
#47
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Dec 10, 2017, 7:55 am
#48
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MRY - CNX - TXL
Programs: UA 1K / *G / Marriott PE / Expedia Gold+ / Hertz PC
Posts: 7,058
No surprise; that was a major part of the route strategy with the 787s. Maybe UA was flat out wrong at the time. Maybe other things evolved in the interim. It appears UA is no longer willing to press its luck on those routes.
Isn't that what these China routes were? Skipping over a connection in Tokyo to get right to the smaller onward destination.
Isn't that what these China routes were? Skipping over a connection in Tokyo to get right to the smaller onward destination.
Dec 10, 2017, 8:44 am
#49
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,971
I don't know how much premium traffic there is to XIY. HGH is probably better but it did not work either. CTU is even better so hopefully it works out.
Wasn't some of this done because of subsidy from the Chinese cities/airports?
It is not premium cabin but I wonder how much UA developed the tourist group market - both US to China (going in from City X and out from City Y, reducing domestic China flying which is frequently seriously delayed) and China to US. I think UA has been able to keep the TPE flight going partially because of the local outbound tourist market.
At the end of the day, if the product is inferior, you can only compete on price and UA can't because it is the highest cost producer compared to the Asian carriers.
Wasn't some of this done because of subsidy from the Chinese cities/airports?
It is not premium cabin but I wonder how much UA developed the tourist group market - both US to China (going in from City X and out from City Y, reducing domestic China flying which is frequently seriously delayed) and China to US. I think UA has been able to keep the TPE flight going partially because of the local outbound tourist market.
At the end of the day, if the product is inferior, you can only compete on price and UA can't because it is the highest cost producer compared to the Asian carriers.
Dec 10, 2017, 8:46 am
#50
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: ORD
Programs: United 100K, Etihad Gold, Marriot Platinum, Hilton Gold
Posts: 578
Disappointed to see this route go, however every time I would visit Shaanxi or Xian we would go to Shanghai first to visit with our China HQ first, making the non stop flight completely pointless for me. Also that whole area is a big oil / petrochemical area, quite possible the slow down in global commodities negatively effected this route. The good news is it is still really easy to get to Xian from any of the major Chinese cities.
Dec 10, 2017, 10:02 pm
#51
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: UA Million Mile, Mileage Plus Premier 1K, SkyMiles Gold Medallion, AAdvantage Gold
Posts: 875
They can always use the 787 to give SFO-PPT a shot.
Dec 10, 2017, 11:44 pm
#52
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
It has nothing to do with the brand; it has everything to do with the market for travel to XIY. If it was the brand but the demand was there, other airlines would be jumping to start service. One of the easiest ways to penetrate a market is when there is demand but lack of suitable alternatives. That’s not the case here.
I had my doubts that there was enough premium traffic on this route that would take UNITED (vs. Chinese Carriers with a connection), and I also don't think that a 3x week route works for business travel in any event. It appears that I was correct. But undoubtably United having a damaged brand in China did not help to get XIY side premium traffic (or US side premium traffic) to book on UA - either direct from SFO, or with a connection in SFO, vs. taking a connection elsewhere.
Dec 11, 2017, 3:31 am
#53
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Bay Area
Programs: UA 1k now; AA (no status); HY Diamond; SPG Platinum
Posts: 707
Some thoughts/questions:
I think it was good that UA tried to do these things. Maybe Wuhan should be next to try - it is a much bigger city?
Maybe this was just bad timing - with the Dr. Dao incident and some people feel America does not like foreigners nowadays?
Don't Apple employees fly Economy?
What to do with all the 787s? Maybe use them on some of the thinner European routes and pull the 757s back to domestic?
I think it was good that UA tried to do these things. Maybe Wuhan should be next to try - it is a much bigger city?
Maybe this was just bad timing - with the Dr. Dao incident and some people feel America does not like foreigners nowadays?
Don't Apple employees fly Economy?
What to do with all the 787s? Maybe use them on some of the thinner European routes and pull the 757s back to domestic?
For us based I think it’s 7 hours- you get business.
For Asia it’s 10, or 7 hours if you take red eye and go to office immediately after you land.
Dec 11, 2017, 10:26 pm
#55
formerly FrequentFlyKid
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Programs: United Global Services, Marriott Bonvoy Ambassador, National Executive Elite
Posts: 981
You need demand at both ends. SFO is a UA hub, which (theoretically) allows UA to connect people from the entire US and points north and south. No carrier has a hub at XIY, and as a result no one can gather together traffic from other Chinese cities to send them to SFO, let alone one that did not partner for onward connections.
I had my doubts that there was enough premium traffic on this route that would take UNITED (vs. Chinese Carriers with a connection), and I also don't think that a 3x week route works for business travel in any event. It appears that I was correct. But undoubtably United having a damaged brand in China did not help to get XIY side premium traffic (or US side premium traffic) to book on UA - either direct from SFO, or with a connection in SFO, vs. taking a connection elsewhere.
I had my doubts that there was enough premium traffic on this route that would take UNITED (vs. Chinese Carriers with a connection), and I also don't think that a 3x week route works for business travel in any event. It appears that I was correct. But undoubtably United having a damaged brand in China did not help to get XIY side premium traffic (or US side premium traffic) to book on UA - either direct from SFO, or with a connection in SFO, vs. taking a connection elsewhere.