JVPhoto

JHake10

AndyInSaigon

True. There is still quite a lot of US-based C traffic in & out of VN. But in my experience talking with fellow American passengers they typically work for US companies invested in Malaysia, Vietnam, China, & such. Typically a UA flier my fly out to SIN & return from HKG, PVG or TPE, visiting many facilities on the trip.

I do wish they'd re-enter the market though. It'd make my last couple of years doing this a bit more convenient. I really dislike the NRT-SGN NH flight so I fly to SIN & get a connection on SQ.

jsloan

Correct.

I don't know what PR's load factors on YVR-JFK were, but I do know that it was never heavily marketed as a standalone flight. For one thing, it was ineligible for preclearance at YVR. Also, the timing is bad westbound -- a midnight departure at NYC with a 3 AM arrival at YVR. Furthermore, PR's target markets were the Filipino community in NYC and YVR (and, via connections, the rest of Canada -- there are plenty of Canadian residents with Filipino passports who would not be able to transit the US without getting a visa). I doubt they had a ton of interest in selling seats from YVR to JFK and vv unless they were sure they couldn't sell the seat to a through passenger instead.

However, I don't think that example really applies to TG or VN. I don't think either of those airlines would be particularly successful selling JFK-YVR flights either. I just don't think it's a huge market -- for example, tomorrow there are three flights. The PR flight, the CX flight, and an AC flight to EWR. Even in the summer, it only goes to 5 flights -- UA adds an EWR flight and DL adds a JFK flight, both on narrowbodies.

The better question is whether or not there's a market for a new Asian carrier to enter the market for the US west coast to Asia. Specifically looking at fifth freedom flights, I don't know why you would fly TG or VN between, say, SFO-NRT or LAX-ICN or whatever. There are already plenty of options there, and while TG is nice (I haven't flown VN), it's not really that much nicer than NH, SQ, CX, OZ, BR, etc.

If TG or VN enters the US market, I think it will specifically be for flights from BKK or SGN/HAN to the US west coast, with the intent of being the only nonstop in the market. Could UA beat them to the punch? Absolutely, but there's an asymmetry there. Access to the US market seems to be treated as a point of pride for a foreign carrier -- like being able to sell seats into LHR as opposed to LGW, for example. Either TG or VN might be willing to operate the route as a loss due to the prestige involved. I don't think access to BKK or SGN is treated the same way for a US carrier, at least for their domestic customers. I don't see UA running the BKK operation at a loss in order to be able to market themselves as "the only US carrier with nonstop flights to Bangkok."

DA201

There's a reason the vast majority of new businesses fail.

I agree. I don't think TG or VN are going to start fifth freedom flights to the US anytime soon, but rather they will start nonstops sometime in the future. UA wouldn't fly SFO-BKK to be the only carrier with nonstop to BKK, they would do it to make money. The question is whether or not they can make money on the route. I personally do think it has money making potential, but I could be wrong.

spin88

I think that this is an important issue, and counsels against UA adding a BKK or SGN flight. Both local carriers want/need USA access, and a p/l calculation short/mid-term is not the key consideration. No doubt both - which have lower cost structures to begin with - and are both getting A359s, are not going to be seeking the 15+% margins that the analysts are demanding of UA for new routes. I would actually think that KUL would be a less risky bet re competition, it is not like MH is going to be a hot-shot carrier anytime soon, if ever.

tvhead

I would be very happy with a TG non-stop to SFO or LAX . . . . .
as long as I could buy at a competitive price on 016 plating and earn PQD.

But I'd really love to see UA fly BKK-SFO - as long as TG would honor my status and give me access to the Royal Orchid lounge when I'm flying with a UA boarding pass.

goodeats21

I am doubtful getting competitive pricing on 016 ticket for a TG non stop ex-USA is going to happen.

United flights ex BKK would certainly get access to any *A lounge for *G or greater, or business class....just like any other *A carrier. Not that the Royal Orchid lounge is all that great. No access to the Royal Spa, BTW. Spa is reserved for TG Metal only.

I would bet that United's ground costs would be lower than they had before, as they would just contract out all the necessary services at BKK, instead of re-opening a ground station there...

jsloan

I would be shocked if it did.

Given that PQD are here to stay, I really hope UA will follow DL and AA's lead and allow PQD on non-016 tickets.

drewguy

From a national security standpoint I sure hope DOD doesn't subject our troops to Y in a 77W - they'll hardly be in fighting shape upon landing.

CALMSP

will be way better than the 744 that was being used.

Kacee

You'd probably not see competitive pricing on TG stock, either. TG's fares tend to be irrational/uncompetitive. It's one of the reasons they consistently bleed cash.

harryhood

Selfishly, as someone who flies DEN-SGN a few times a year (usually connecting through NRT onto the ANA 767 torture devices -- bad in J, horrific in Y) I would be thrilled to see a better option especially in J. LAX/SFO-SGN would mak eme very, very happy.

EmailKid

And yet, every time I fly with them, the planes are full. OK, in coach, with very few seats open.

Methinks that they fill their planes with Chinese tourists flying on bulk rates, so ya, they are asking for money from Thai government every year.

PsiFighter37

OO dba UAX is starting IAD-PBG on a CRJ2 (announced today)...probably not the route or plane type people are thinking about