As I see it, there are several big trends among the ”big three” US carriers that I think will be interesting to watch over the coming months and years. [...]
This discussion thread is connected to our post: How Costly Will Delta’s Asia Growth Be? United Executive Taunts Delta, And The Numbers Aren’t Pretty.
"They’re unable to fill up their airplanes" didn't United run a 67.2% on LAXHKG in 2025? I think they need to worry about their own problems instead of constantly trying to be Delta.
Pretty sure UA already has talked about their solution to the LF issue on LAX-HKG -- it was called the tags and it's even addressed in this article.
Keep up with the news if you want to make snarky comments.
It’s just going to be a matter of time when United criticizes delta for not flying to Asia out of JFK. It would be something like “delta doesn’t even fly to Asia out of New York while we do and even meager 3rd place American does.” Can already imagine Scott Kirby predicting that delta would lose money on JFK-DXB if it decides to start service on that route a few years from now.
DL gonna get smoked across the Pacific. Of course one dogmatic failed “analyst” will soon show up saying he knows better than the UA execs with all their data and industry visibility.
you do realize that DL has made more money per seat mile flying the Pacific than UA for almost a decade - as soon as DL started to dismantle the NRT hub?
UA rushed into add capacity and take the title of largest TPAC airline which it handedly is regardless of nationality - but it operated its TPAC network at breakeven for 3 years pre-covid.
UA still has lots of dead wood in its TPAC network as evidenced the lower profitability per seat mile; seasonal narrowbody routes to Mongolia and holding onto NRT flights only hurts UA's profitability even as UA touts its size.
As I noted in the AA article, UA suffers from the same TPAC disease that AA suffers in the domestic arena - a "need" to be larger than anybody else which leads to an inability to monetize that size - and in fact generates lower profitability per seat mile than DL which has a far more balanced global network.
There are opportunities for DL to grow its TPAC network and UA's higher profits post covid prove that DL can grow. Even apart from its financial strength, DL has a fleet and corporate travel advantage that it will increasingly use to win against UA in the Pacific.
You do realize that UA is over twice the size of DL in the Pacific, right? The cherrypicking is over.
nobody has doubted that for a decade.
The point is simply whether UA's size is large enough to keep DL from winning over traffic on new routes, esp. from LAX where DL is actually the larger in the domestic market and has more corporate contracts there and nationwide.
for TPAC as a whole, UA's size at SFO is also its vulnerability. DL has used its stronger position to E. Asia outside of CA to generate revenue that UA cannot carry over SFO and likely will not win over even if it tries.
SFO is a great asset but DL has figured out how to work around the rest of the US market including LAX which is a bigger market for most E. Asia countries than SFO - even before considering the rest of the US which DL carries quite effectively via SLC, MSP, DTW and ATL and soon JFK
Nothing but wishful thinking.
LTD, "Stop fixating on data." You all are ‘cherrypicking’.
first, a few factual corrections.
DL has never and still does not have the majority of its TPAC capacity to ICN, let alone used for connections. Up until the start of SLC-ICN, DL had more flights on its own metal to Tokyo than ICN; DL has served China continuously for decades and also added ICN. ICN connections are simply not the majority of DL's capacity
second, there are factual reports that DL is filling up its LAX-HKG flight. we don't know the yield they are getting but there is also information that UA's yields on its LAX-HKG flights were very low before they tagged a LAX and SFO HKG flight on to SE Asia. Tags might deliver some more revenue but they disproportionately increase costs.
It is not a surprise that UA execs will become increasingly on the attack against DL just as they have been w/ other carriers - but reality shows that they aren't the biggest winner against the LCCs and ULCCs as they said they would be and they have failed to drive AA out of ORD; it is very unlikely that UA exec chest thumping will be any more successful against DL than it has been against other airlines.
and if the rumored move of SEA-TPE to LAX and the start of another SEA flight to SE Asia takes place, on top of the start of LAX-MNL and the inevitable start of LAX-ICN on DL metal, UA's reign as the largest international carrier at LAX is over and there is nothing that UA can do about it.
And as much as some want to tout how great UA's SFO hub is - and it is - it is also their near exclusive focus to Asia from SFO that provides DL with huge opportunities. Every UA Asia market from SFO has LAX as one of its largest sources of traffic while DL already is the largest US carrier to East Asia from outside of CA and even the west coast (to also exclude SEA). DL has more capacity to E. Asia from ATL, DTW, MSP and SLC than UA has to E. Asia outside of CA. and DL hasn't even started adding JFK to Asia flights - which are coming - and potentially BOS to Asia as well.
Although there will be all kinds of squeels from the UA fan crowd, DL not only has a financial advantage to UA as DL builds up its Asia presence but DL also has a growing fleet advantage. The 359s are larger and more capable than UA's 789s and the 35Ks will only increase that advantage.
Of course UA execs are going to take pot shots at DL as they have against other airlines; their own track record of taking out competitors is actually pretty poor and their comments about DL's Pacific expansion will be equally as misplaced.
I correct factually inaccurate statements regardless of who makes them.
DL's TPAC system is not majority ICN connecting.
DL will use its 35Ks heavily to increase gauge at ICN and KE will likely add new cities like AUS on their 789s which is the smallest TPAC plane in the JV joint fleet
but DL is growing its own network with cities other than to Tokyo and Seoul faster than it is growing ICN capacity (which I believe is the point Ben is trying to make) - and THAT is what UA is deathly afraid of because DL will be quite successful in those markets.
"DL's TPAC system is not majority ICN connecting."
it's funny how sometimes ICN is the best thing since sliced bread with you, Tim. Sometimes it's not.
But if ignore Delta's JV, sure... Delta is only ~45% flights through ICN. If you include what you actually said... Yes. Delta's TPAC system (which would include KE) is very much majority via ICN
to also sum up an actual LTD quote: "NOBODY HAS MORE FLIGHTS TO ASIA FROM MINNESOTA AND MICHIGAN THAN DELTA DOES!!! THIS IS AN ACTUAL POINT THAT I KEEP REPEATING THAT MEANS SOMETHING!!!!"
Tim,
can you please provide facts for your ‘factual reports’ comment in paragraph 2 that LAX-HKG flight is filling up?
Ben provides charts and real data from airline reports. I’m trying to view all comments as neutral but you need to do a better job of backing up your ‘facts.’
I think I'll just get my coffee and popcorn ready today... I can see below this already set someone off
Separate from that, interesting post, Ben. so much more "Cranky Flier" of you than usual
Do 'average consumers in Asia' really have much to do with this? Do US carriers really carry a meaningful amount of people based in the likes of MNL and SGN?
Their European route strategies stay away from important affluent metropolitan areas like NRW or Greater Manchester and even massive countries like Poland, almost certainly because they don't seem to be very interested in marketing their flights outside of the USA point of sale. I'd be surprised if they were using a completely different approach for Asia.
Delta has definitely lost some of their sparkle and United has greatly improved but United executives arrogance has great surpassed Delta. They are obsessed with negatives or other airlines. Why don’t they just focus on their successes? It’s not a good look.
Q2 2026 Pacific
ASM/PRASM/Yield/Load factor (% growth YOY)
AAL: 8.2/15.0/17.3/?
UAL: 4.1/14.0/10.9/2.3
DAL: 8.0/7.0/7.0/-1.0
Adding PRASM & load factor shows it is even more stark. Yikes!
Tim ... Any assertion can be opposed by merely turning the graph or chart upside down .
Great point, Alert.
Also, "I know you are but what am I?" is another way to use logic to refute assertions that lack evidence.
All Ben has to do to generate click traffic (when he is running low on other ideas) is to hang some red meat for Tim Dunn with a "story" like this. And that guy gets sucked in like a moth to fire.
Meanwhile, most major cities in East Asia are already served by airlines that people would actually want to fly with.