U.S. airlines aren’t able to just decide to fly to Tokyo Haneda airport. Based on an agreement with Japan, the Department of Transportation was able to assign 12 day time slot pairs to U.S. carriers, starting summer 2020. That’s up from just 5 slots pairs previously.
Before the pandemic American flew to Tokyo Haneda from LAX, Delta from LAX and Minneapolis, United from San Francisco and Hawaiian from Honolulu. Airlines applied to DOT, arguing for specific routes which would have the most consumer benefit. The decision criteria is supposed to be about what is best for passengers, not best for airlines.
These airlines are now allowed to serve Tokyo Haneda airport from:
- American Airlines: Dallas-Fort Worth; Los Angeles
- Delta Air Lines: Seattle; Detroit; Atlanta; Portland; Honolulu; Los Angeles; Minneapolis
- Hawaiian Airlines: Honolulu
- United Airlines: Newark; Chicago O’Hare; Washington-Dulles; Los Angeles; San Francisco
These awards to Delta, allowing them to become the largest U.S. carrier at Haneda with almost everything they asked for, didn’t increase service between the U.S. and Tokyo. Instead it allowed them to drop their historic Tokyo Narita hub which they acquired from Northwest Airlines. They prefer Haneda for non-stop Tokyo service (since it’s far more convenient to Tokyo) and to use their joint venture with Korean to push connecting traffic through Seoul.
DOT’s rule on these slots was that, once service commenced, none could go dormant for more than 90 days or the route authority could be taken back and awarded to another airline.
With Japan late to re-open, and traditional managed business travel still depressed, U.S. – Japan flying hasn’t recovered nearly as much as domestic travel or flying between the U.S. and Europe.
Delta wants its Haneda slots to be more flexible. It applied to the DOT to allow it "gateway flexibility" rather than being tied to the 2019 route plans. And it shared some sobering stats on just how depressed the demand is. ATL is best at 64% of 2019 levels.#AvGeek pic.twitter.com/UeWHyUFMD0
— Seth Miller (@WandrMe) May 1, 2023
Delta is asking to be allowed to keep all of its Tokyo Haneda flights while using two of them from wherever they wish “as part of a three-year pilot program” that would be available to other carriers as well.
- It may be the case that what’s best for consumers now has changed compared to when the DOT made its assignments in 2019.
- However DOT assigned routes, which were entrusted to specific airlines based on plans about how they’d serve those routes (for instance, what connections would be possible). They didn’t grant property rights in slots to airlines, and even said significant deviation from service plans would mean reconsidering what to do with the slots.
Delta dropped its Tokyo Narita hub, and was granted the largest presence at Haneda to serve specific routes because that service was deemed in the best interests of consumers. Now they want to treat those route authorities as a property right to do with as they wish. That ought to be a non-starter (can’t blame cronyist Delta for trying).
While I haven’t yet seen it published in the docket, reportedly American Airlines filed a response in support of the idea presumably because they’d like to move their Los Angeles – Tokyo Haneda flight.
As a current U.S.-Haneda slot holder, American supports the requested relief. Enabling flexible, market-based decision-making for U.S.-Haneda service is warranted in the current demand environment. Gateway flexibility for up to two current slot pairs would create public benefits by allowing all participating carriers to adapt their networks to the evolving conditions.
In a world where carriers were free to serve the airport from wherever they wished without limitation, then of course they should be able to choose where they serve it from. But since each airline is capped at the number of flights, to and from specific cities, that were proposed to DOT and determined based on a consumer benefit standard and not an airline profit standard airlines should operate what they committed to or return the slots to be re-allocated.
Hawaiian serves Tokyo with primarily leisure service that hasn’t recovered. They might not want more Tokyo service. But American Airlines – which only got half of what it asked for from DOT four years ago – has a joint venture with Japan Airlines and should certainly ask for more service (but American has become a largely domestic airline, skittish in its network planning). They’d be able to connect passengers beyond Haneda with their Japan Airlines joint venture. They might not get approval for their 2019-proposed second DFW flight or Las Vegas flight, but perhaps New York JFK or Miami would work.
I’m surprised crony capitalist Delta doesn’t offer a nonstop Tokyo-Miami or Tokyo-Orlando flight since DeSantis and others in Florida have been desperate to attract a nonstop from somewhere in Florida to Asia. I’m sure generous subsidies are being offered.
That aside, four observations:
1) The Japanese are notorious for liking law and order as well as clean cities. I wouldn’t be surprised if all the homelessness and crime problems in Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles and even Honolulu have caused a significant drop in the demand.
2) Japan is a dying market demographically. Korea has tremendous risk because of North Korea.
3) Delta doesn’t seem to have really had an effective plan for pulling out of Narita. Even United kept flights at Narita. Abandoning Narita, reducing Honolulu flights to/from Japan and ending Hong Kong, Singapore, Manila, Guam, Palau, Saipan and other intra-Asia flights seems like a huge mistake. These days, if you want to go to Asia you fly United and Star Alliance.
4) Seems like flights to Tokyo from several Delta hubs would be a good use of global upgrade certificates given the demand recovery numbers.
Would love to see a Miami Tokyo flight— after all we have a Japanese consulate here and seemingly growing relationships between FL and Japan
Can you PLEASE proofread before you post? Look at the title of your post. You really cant take a second to make sure it looks right? This is THAT important? Lazy.
Delta might consider lowering its ridiculously high Biz fares to HND. They might get more passengers. I can find much cheaper ways to Tokyo not using Delta.
1. Delta is asking to TEMPORARILY MOVE gateways for 3 years for ALL carriers. There is no request to return frequencies or for any other carrier to gain frequencies.
2. Haneda is the ONLY airport with which the US has open skies that is frequency limited as well as being slot controlled. The US should have never agreed to Open Skies involving an airport that is not fully open for any US airline to add flights where and when they want. AA and UA got joint ventures with JL and NH respectively as part of the “Open Skies” agreement.
3. JL and NH are both allowed to move their allocations to other cities and have done so.
4. AA came out and support DL’s request because they, like DL, see no value to themselves or consumers by being locked into rigid route rules.
5. The DOT has allowed route allocations to be moved to other cities by US carriers in the past – and NOT to countries with which the US has Open Skies.
Delta is asking for something that is permitted under US regulations and is supported by AA so far. The chances are high that the DOT will approve them.
As for where those routes will go, the chances are fairly high that DL will add JFK and BOS to HND. No US airline flies from JFK or BOS to East Asia although JL and/or NH do.
Reflexive Diamond Tim must be sleeping late this morning. Normally he would be on here by now telling everyone they don’t know what they are talking about.
FNT,
DL’s NRT hub inherited from NW was not profitable because they had to flow widebody aircraft through NRT which depressed fares on the intra-Asia portion.
The Japanese government itself has said that longhaul premium international flights in time will operate from HND and NRT will be for shorthaul, low cost traffic.
The Japanese government would not allow Delta to move its 5th freedom intra-Asia flights to Haneda.
HND already gets much higher average fares than NRT in the same markets such as to/from the US. NRT is not viable as a local market airport given how much further it is from Tokyo if there is service to HND from the same airport.
Lots of proof here that DL’s TPAC network is little more than smoke and mirrors and likely, hugely unprofitable. DL made its bed in HND and it ought to stick with it. It got what it wanted, but poor DL doesn’t have the business traffic to sustain its large slot allocation at HND. Too bad.
There’s such a thing as being too smart for your own good.
FNT Delta Diamond must think that people who fly to SFO or LAX only visit downtown SF or LA, and not:
– visit family (in the city or the suburbs)
– go to theme parks like Disneyland or the beach
– visit businesses in suburban office parks like Silicon Valley
– go to educational institutions
Turn off Fox News and read a book.
DL ruined what NWA had in the Pacific (it was profitable under them) and they bullied to get the other routes added. I think the shine is off the DL terd and they should have MSP, DTW and HNL routes stripped in favor of AA getting them for MIA (DL is weak weak weak in S Florida, even with Latam) and PHX (fastest growing metro and tech city in the country for the past 8 years and no stopping it). AA and UA do great with their partnerships with JAL and ANA, DL has none. Time to reward the airlines, businesses and communities that will benefit from the routes. DL’s 15 minutes of fame is over. . .Delta. . .Descending.
HAHAHAHAHA, oh Timmy. Gary ruined his day.
actual facts differ from the statements many make here and I am here solely to present facts and truth.
– NW was the largest transpacific airline for years but its transpacific system DID NOT consistently make money. It lost substantial amounts of money for years.
– Delta inherited the NRT hub and tinkered for a few years but began cutting beyond NRT destinations because they weren’t profitable.
– United jumped in and expanded across the Pacific but became unprofitable while Delta became the only US airline that was consistently profitable flying the Pacific pre-covid.
– Japan, not any airline, made the decision that HND would be the Tokyo airport for all longhaul premium carrier (full service) flights while NRT would become a low cost carrier airport. Other countries have made similar airport access requirements. How many flights does United or American have from LGW or ORY?
– NRT Is not viable as a hub for much longer based on the same principle that applies at LHR and CDG – which are the premium airports for longhaul travel.
– AA and UA traded giving Delta more access to HND for the ability to launch JVs with Japanese carriers.
– DL tried but failed to operate select longhaul flights from HND and instead is developing its partnership with Korean as the connecting hub in NE Asia while HND will be all about local traffic. Even if AA and UA are carrying more traffic via NRT, their revenues per flight are far below what they or Delta carry to/from HND for local Tokyo passengers.
– Delta is still in the process of restructuring its transpacific network but has the most growth longhaul capacity of any US airline and already has the most efficient widebody fleet. An expected order for A350-1000s would give Delta a significant cost advantage that will last for more than a decade – and the A350 is the best plane for transpacific operations.
– American is ALSO supporting what Delta is asking for and it is very likely that the DOT will grant Delta’s request which will apply to ALL US carriers including Hawaiian which is ALSO not operating all of its allocated HND flights.
– it is almost certain that UA will also move some of its flights around – but the DOT and AA and DL will all note that UA/NH is the largest frequency holder to HND and has a vested interest in rejecting their opposition if it even materializes.
facts are facts as uncomfortable as they are for some people
Timmy Drinking Game:
-Take a drink if he mentions DOT stats
-Take a drink if he mentions Delta’s MRO
-Take a drink if he mentions the future A350-1000 order
that would be YOUR drinking game… because it debunks the myths that you and others you want to believe.
Get back w/ us and let us know what HND flights AA and UA ALSO move.
I am guessing right off the bat that AA will drop its overnight LAX-HND and move it somewhere else.
You’d think Gary would be cheering for it to move to AUS
@Tim Dunn – unquestionably airlines want to take their Haneda authorities and turn them into property rights, and AA would drop LAX. Would I love an AUS Haneda flight? Selfishly absolutely, hah!
@Tim Dunn “AA and UA traded giving Delta more access to HND for the ability to launch JVs with Japanese carriers.” Those JVs may be *why* DOT was willing to give Delta a privileged position at HND but that’s not the same thing as saying the airlines traded for it (the way, say, airlines colluded over how the Wright Amendment restrictions would be imposed at and then ultimately lifted at Love Field – airlines in a room, horsetrading).
@Tim Dunn – “AA came out and support DL’s request because they, like DL, see no value to themselves or consumers by being locked into rigid route rules.”
But they, like Delta, want what is best for *themselves* which isn’t the standard that’s supposed to apply here… There are limited route authorities to hand out and DOT’s job isn’t to decide which major airline wins them for their own purposes, their job is to decide which airline proposal best furthers the public interest.
The DOT knows and builds rules around route awards being a public service by for-profit companies.
The DOT has granted international route usage exemptions for going on 4 years. If routes cannot be economically viable based on the current level of demand – which is going to go down after the summer which airlines can already see – then they won’t be viable long-term. It is better to reallocate those frequencies where they can best be used.
And, yes, AA and UA knew that HND would not be full Open Skies when they asked for a JV. By the time those JVs were granted, DL had already made the argument that it should get the majority of US carrier HND slots. If AA and UA didn’t like that arrangement, they could have walked away – but didn’t. AA and UA DID trade JVs for reduced HND access. DL is once again the largest foreign carrier at HND just as NW was before the forced move to NRT and NW or DL was during the entire time NW/DL was at NRT.
The only losers are the carriers that want to block competition – which does not include AA or DL. UA might agree by they might just not say anything.
Your article on IAD is precisely the point. There is nothing wrong w/ allowing ALL carriers to compete on the same basis.
@Tim Dunn – “The DOT has granted international route usage exemptions for going on 4 years. If routes cannot be economically viable based on the current level of demand – which is going to go down after the summer which airlines can already see – then they won’t be viable long-term. It is better to reallocate those frequencies where they can best be used.”
Yes, DOT should reallocate the routes based on public benefit, not let airlines pick based on their benefit.
“There is nothing wrong w/ allowing ALL carriers to compete on the same basis.”
That’s what a new proceeding for flights airlines no longer choose to operate would allow!
Tim,
DL shared that they are likely not profitable flying to HND in current situation.
as a for profit company, its fair for them to ask to shift, try something new and they should, just like AA is.
But for public’s sake, DOT needs to evaluate the benefit of shifting routes.
To me, its clear that DL made a bet on shifting focus from Tokyo to Seoul, and keep Tokyo as O/D but its not working out as planned from current US cities. Not sure if other metros would be better.
For the connecting hubs, it will depend to connectivity from ICN vs NRT/HND.
As of today, I see very limited options at ICN to travel beyond, and once DL/KE are able to fix that, then we will see. And even then, with long range planes, connecting hubs are not as important as they used to be. For example, 4 daily non-stop options to Singapore from SFO.
I have never seen any facts that UA loses money to JP or Asia as a whole, like you always mention. Frankly, UA is mostly a int’l airline and if they are not making money flying abroad, I am not sure where they make money then.
DOT data reports profitability by global region. United and American both lost money flying to Asia while Delta made money between 2017 and 2019
Gary
Why is it not in the public benefit for American to fly 2x DFW to HND vs from LAX ? Your logic doesn’t fly because it rigidly locks airlines into decisions which is neither compare Open Skies or consumer benefit
@Tim Dunn “Why is it not in the public benefit for American to fly 2x DFW to HND vs from LAX ?”
Maybe it is – but this needs to be compared to alternate options, not just whether it’s better for AA to fly 2x from DFW than 1x DFW 1x LAX. Maybe a LAS flight would be better. Maybe MIA. Maybe a US carrier flying from JFK. Airlines should offer proposals.
The flights were awarded based on proposals to fly specific routes by each airline, based on a belief about which routes were best for consumers. Maybe that’s all changed, but then so too should potentially the allocation of which airline gets how many routes!
again, you miss the point that HND is part of the US-Japan Open Skies agreement. No other airport is NOT fully open for US airlines to add flights as they want and to whatever destination they want.
if your argument is valid, then HND should never have been included in Open Skies – because US airlines do not have to ask the government how of when they fly to airports under Open Skies agreements.
Even at LHR, there are slots but any US or British airline can fly where they want as long as they obtain the slots.
Your arguments might be valid – but not in this context. You are arguing for restrictions and the freedom from those very restrictions at the same time – and that is impossible.
@Tim Dunn – “You are arguing for restrictions and the freedom from those very restrictions at the same time”
You are imagining things that are not there.
I am stating exactly what you wrote. You want consumer choice and rigid inflexible rules. Those two are not compatible w each other or the concept of Open Skies
Good discussion though
As for the comments about profitability, it isn’t likely AA or UA are profitable to Japan either right now. They just are carrying some more flow traffic beyond Japan but not at yields high enough to be profitable. Delta’s demand chart isn’t just applicable to Delta gateways
And the longer it takes for Haneda to be profitable the less viable economically Narita flights will be. It is in no one’s interest for anyone to not be profitable or choose to be unprofitable including to pursue market share goals
@Tim Dunn “. You want consumer choice and rigid inflexible rules. ”
Nope. I don’t want airlines to promise one thing to gain route authorities, and then be granted a property right to do something else.
Delta dropped Narita? Jesus. That kills access to Guam and Saipan. Now you have to fly through Korea to get to Guam and it looks like you can’t even get to Saipan anymore. What a stupid move. It’s not hard to get from Narita to Tokyo. It’s a short train ride. One more bonehead move from Delta
Let’s not forget that Delta largely eliminated its Asia routes NOT because of its expanded relationship with Korean Air in Seoul but because it inked a deal with communist-owned China Eastern in Shanghai. China Eastern was supposed to supplant Delta flying its own metal to most of Asia. How is that working? I don’t think I’ve heard Delta mention China Eastern since covid.
Gary
Delta is flying exactly the remaining routes to the US that t flew from Narita and Haneda before COVID that it is now authorized from Haneda. The new authorizations went into effect during COVID. There were no beyond Narita routes left. The chart you inserted shows the routes Delta flew from Haneda before COVID without beyond Tokyo rights and the demand is down on them as well.
COVID messed alot up. AA would not have requested 2 LAX HND routes if COVID was known ti happen. United’s Haneda local traffic is down as much as Delta.
The DOT gets it even if you and others don’t and the DOT will very likely allow the flights to be moved. The DOT’s job is to maximize the value of the US’ negotiated rights and nobody else has shown that they aren’t doing any better or could do better
And in a few years, there will be no premium transpacific flights from Narita anyway.
Your statement is patently false , Fnt
Delta dropped its beyond Narita routes because the Japanese government would not allow them to transfer to Haneda. Delta saw and sees the end of US carriers at Narita. AA and UA are just there feeding their partner hubs.
You have no idea how the original NRT HND divestiture happened. HND is BY FAR the superior gateway in Tokyo. To argue differently is pure hokum. When the government of Japan decided to change the slots to HND they did it in 100% benefit to AA and UAL in that they had code share agreements with ANA and JAL. Their passengers could connect on HND. DAL had no such dance partner. In effect, taking away choices for passengers. No business traveler would pick NRT over HND. So making the NRT flights worthless. Why wouldn’t DAL try to make HND profitable? The insouciance that the Japanese Government has yo-up’s the HND slots has been in direct contradiction to “Open Skies” (which HND is excluded)
The DOT should take the unused slots back and reallocate.
RF,
the DOT and multiple governments have granted multiple exemptions for slot usage worldwide. There is no reason why Japan should be any different.
The demand to/from Japan has simply not return to normal and may not; Japanese people have stated they have much less desire to travel than before covid and the country is aging.
Again, no one else has indicated they are doing better – because they are not. Delta just happens to be the most willing to speak out about economic challenges that others are seeing but try to pretend don’t exist.
It serves no one’s interest to force the cancellation of flights that could work better elsewhere.
Again, for the umpteenth time, the US and Japan have an Open Skies agreement and yet Haneda is the ONLY airport where airlines are not free to decide where and when they want to fly.
If slots need to be forfeited, then the joint ventures between AA-JL and UA-NH should also be cancelled. Joint ventures are only allowed under Open Skies – which the US does not have with Haneda.
and the Japanese airlines ARE FREE to move their own flights to other cities and have done so. Delta is simply asking for something that the Japanese airlines have and their US joint venture partners can do.
And, finally, Hawaiian also is not using all of its flight authorizations right now. This isn’t just about Delta even though Delta brought it up.
You and others are likely to be disappointed when the DOT grants the request.
Tim, even if your information on UA’s Pacific performance is accurate, which I don’t think it is, you’re using data from 2017? Did you also create Southwest’s ad staying they carry the most DEN pax, based on 2011 figures?
UA has stated that their Pacific operation is profitable, with the possible exception of China, though that may have changed by now.
They are running more of their pre-COVID Pacific schedule than anyone else, including the majority of their Japanese flights, all while expanding more flights in the region.
They are the biggest airline across the Pacific and Atlantic, and they do so profitably, stating their bookings are stronger than in 2019.
Yes, the A350-1000 has a lower seat cost than smaller planes, but that means they have more seats to fill profitably. If it was all about seat costs, you’d see A350s on every flight around the world, domestic and international.
12 replies from tim on an article about delta. Who is even surprised by Tim’s lack of a life anymore…
1. Learn about revenue accounting and the lack of DOT standards in how the data is reported by airlines. How many times do you need to be told this?
2. Delta is the one that wrote reams of public documents to DOT about why cities like pdx and MSP deserved service to Haneda over other airline bids like multiple frequency slot requests to lax and dfw. Delta wrote response after response about those two cities and how it served the public interest to give delta the Haneda slots for those two cities specifically.
Delta made their bed. Let them lay in it. Anyone with a brain knew a flight with no real connections on either end like Portland and Haneda was never going to work long term but delta is the airline that repeatedly told DOT that it would and dissed other competing proposals.
Where have you been?
United and American execs themselves said on earnings calls that they lost money flying some Pacific routes.
The airlines themselves provide financial data to the DOT which publishes it. As many times as you argue otherwise, American and United both lost money precovid during the best of times for the industry flying the Pacific while Delta was making money because Delta realized size does not matter if you can’t make money.
American realized it also and got rid of dozens of aircraft.
Ego driven United still touts size and can’t or won’t explain why the world’s largest airline across the Pacific was only stopped from losing more money by a global pandemic.
Meanwhile American and Delta support gateway flexibility and more DCA slot exemptions. United is the loser. All. Around.
@Tim Dunn: thanks for your valuable facts and contributions. The original article is extremely weak in its analysis.
Ever thought about starting a blog? This one is turning into a vacuous click-bait rag featuring expert pieces such as “American Airlines Forces Two Women To Change Into More Revealing Clothes In Order To Fly” and half-baked half-wrong “analysis” like this one.
Quality vs. quantity would be welcomed.
@Tim, if UA said Pacific wasn’t profitable 6 years ago, then they be 100% credible when they say international is doing extremely well now. Profitable while flying a much larger schedule than DL or AA. They don’t have to fly their robust Japan schedule, but they are. That should speak volumes.l, especially since, as you noted, they have been up front in the past.
The real issue is that DELTA is charging MORE for flights to and from Japan than ANA and JAL.
I am flying into HND and out of Osaka in November and DELTA is $1,500 more than ANA.
Plus ANA is giving me lounge access which DELTA will not, even with Gold Status at DELTA.
Additionally, the food on DELTA has been horrid for the past 5 years.
That is why no one is flying on DELTA to Japan.
International now is not the same as select routes a few years ago. United list money on several China and HKG routes which they cannot do now due to caps on the number of allowable flights
United execs were right about their statements. People here can’t accept the negative even though it is true.
I do write for another site.
I love the discourse! Thanks Tim Dunn!
NRT slots may be quite valuable depending on whether DOT and China can agree to restore direct US CN capacity. I just flew from LAX to CN about 3 weeks ago, and I ended up having to route through NRT or HKG. NRT was hours shorter, and I bought the NRT routing. HND does not have the international connectivity of NRT. The flights into and out of NRT from LAX and CN were fully booked. As of today, Delta’s choice to rely entirely on Tokyo origin/destination traffic and abandon the connectivity of the Northwest NRT system looks foolish.
As for DOT, I agree that they should not allow DL and AA to change their flight pairing. If DL and AA want to give up their slots, they should be returned to competitive bidding. This is only fair. Alaska or Hawaiian or United should have their chance.
I was 100% sure this was coming. Honestly, all that DL does is complain and cry. And it never ends!
They botched their entire Asia strategy. First, they complained about gulf carriers and wanted them out. Dropped even interline with all ME3, KU, etc. Then they brushed off KE who went into into the hands of AS and AA; but then finally managed to form a JV with them. Then, they cannot commit to KE and ICN and complained about JL/AA and NH/UA JVs and got every route they wanted at HND. Now they are complaining they are not able to make those routes work and cook up stories as usual.
All this after they they inherited what was the largest TPAC operation from NW? Seriously? They squandered every bit of
It – lost BKK, HKG, SIN, TPE, NGO, KIX, MNL and entire NRT network. They got a great opportunity at SEA with AS and blew it big and pushed them into oneworld. Now they are saying they still can’t make it work. Complete joke.
DOT just needs to strip those slots from DL and give it to carriers that can actually sustain them.
I completely disagree with your flawed premise. My reasoning is very simple, and doesn’t require the bloviation which permeates many of the above posts.
ANA and JAL can move their Haneda slots around any time they want. That gives Star Alliance and Oneworld at a tremendous advantage over Delta and SkyTeam. The best way to level the playing field is to allow Delta the same percentage of flexible slots as the other alliances have.
It’s that simple.
I should have included the fact that both American and United have Japanese joint venture partners to Haneda – JAL with American, and ANA with United. That’s a deeper relationship than the partnerships involved in an alliance. Both of those joint ventures have route flexibility because of their Japanese partners. Again, I believe Delta should be allowed to have that same level of flexibility.
I love how internet bloggers pretend to be expert Airline route planners. None of the stuff Leaf spews out makes sense about aviation. Go back to your miles gymnastics advise
Ghost is absolutely correct. The US carriers are fundamentally disadvantaged in their ability. AA and UA via their joint ventures regain some of that ability.
DL’s request essentially allows BOTH US and Japanese carriers to have some flexibility on where they can operate routes – which is what Open Skies is supposed to provide.
As for the “oughta, shoulda” comments, US airlines have always had a hard time MAKING MONEY in East Asia, not because of product but because Asian carriers are lower cost producers because of low labor costs – and that is true in E. Asia (Japan is about the only country in Asia with labor costs comparable to the US), South Asia, and the Middle East.
NW did NOT consistently make money and neither did Pan Am, the two legacy large carriers in East Asia. United bought PA’s network and rapidly grew – but was #2 to NW until DL bought NW’s Pacific network and realized there had to be a different approach. As hard as it is for some to accept. UA lost money in a NUMBER OF MARKETS over the past 10 years and has realized that and will probably correct in part because they can’t fly alot of the capacity they once did.
Japan is a shrinking market while virtually every other country is growing. Seoul is a great connecting hub – except for the extra flying time due to current Russian airspace restrictions. Seoul HAD pre-covid more access to China than Japan – and it is simply too early to know what the future of US carrier access to China will be and which hubs will work the best.
Delta is still restructuring its Pacific operations but has 16 new A350-900s which will be as capable as Singapore’s aircraft that can fly 17 hours with a load of 250+ passengers (Delta has just two of those most capable aircraft right now). DL also has 9 used A350-900s which will be converted to Pacific configurations – they are currently being used for high capacity transatlantic flights. And that is before the A350-1000 order which will give Delta a fleet that is as cost efficient as any Asian carrier – which is where the A350-1000s will be used. The A350-900 can fly to Japan from most of DL’s hubs – which is why MSP, LAX, and SEA are using that aircraft now. Markets in the NE plus ATL need the A350.
Delta will very likely gain the approval to move two routes. Portland is a failing market for lots of reasons while Hawaii is just not the most effective place to deploy a valuable slot given other options. ALL US carrier Japan flights are taking much longer to fill than was true w/ other markets. Remember that US carriers are flying a fraction of the flights to China they once had. S. Korea is one of the brightest markets in a region that will be challenging for US carriers.
American also wants this and it is doubtful that United will object even if it doesn’t support this specific proposal because the DOT makes rule changes based on precedent. If United argues against moving gateways, it will come back and bite them later in some other case.
In 6 months, we will likely be talking about new service to HND from several other cities by US airlines.
I just do not understand why the slots should not be released and a new competition for the slots initiated.
Alaska, Hawaiian, JetBlue, etc should have their chance at the gates. If one wants to bar UA from bidding bc of their JV with ANA so be it.
I understand that only the big 3 really operate into Japan, but if an open process isn’t conducted only the big 3 will ever operate into Japan.
Transforming the slots into a semi property right of DL just reeks of corruption.
@John White, I’m a business traveler and I prefer NRT because the connections go to where I need to go. Now, for instance, I need to connect through ICN to get to Guam (and can’t get to Saipan anymore). Haneda doesn’t go anywhere