Japan Airlines' ZIPAIR Plans Huge Expansion, Fleet Of 20 Boeing 787s

Wonder if they'll expand more to the Northeast US or Canada.
I know mainline JAL has routes out of Boston, JFK, and Chicago, but it would be interesting to have a Zipair option out of Toronto, Montreal, BWI, Dulles, etc.

It would be good if Zipair offered oneWorld elites some kind of recognition or status like their parent company JAL.

I really like this concept, I hope it’s financially viable. Long haul low cost doesn’t seem that successful

Hi Ben - "This also sheds some light on Japan Airlines’ recentLY fleet renewal announcement."

Just wanted to point out the "recently."

Thanks!

BTW, JAL has announced they expect to include Alaska into the TPAC JV.

Unclear if it'll get approved with the current administration, but probably more likely.

It's probably too low yielding and inefficient. Longer distances means more cost.

It would also depress JAL's mainline yields, as ZIPAIR does not belong to their JV and nor do they intend on it.

It'll be better for more point to point flying like from SJC/IAH, where JAL doesn't prioritize as much.

@ ML -- Fixed, thank you!

not unexpected but will hurt AA. AA and AS won't have a JV at least for domestic routes.
JL undoubtedly sees more value in getting JL into the JV than protecting AA's west coast interests.

"...and the privilege of using the bathroom".

Ben please do not give the airlines any new ideas...

The concept is compelling for non-business travel to Japan. I could see our family looking at this option when we finally vacation in Japan. The flight from ORD to HND/NRT is way too long to do in coach (I've done it and never will again). But ZIPAIR's business class, while lacking service niceties, has everything you need to make the long trip in some comfort at a price that's 50% (or less) of mainline fares.

I do hope they'll expand to ORD, but if they don't I would still consider flying them from a west coast gateway.

Yeah, it was more of a personal wish than anything since I live in western NY and getting to IAH or the west coast with a positioning flight can get expensive.

I have a very hard time seeing this getting approved, so this is probably a moot point, but I'm not sure your point about domestic routes. The big JVs, including the one between AA and JL, work on an OD basis, not on a flight basis. So yes, AA and AS would share revenue on a passenger that connects, say, ABI-DFW-SEA-NRT with legs on AA, AS, and JL respectively, bc the OD is covered by the JV. I don't believe that either airline would accept JV terms other than those (if imposed by the government or insisted upon by the other carriers). Given that, I'm not sure I see how this hurts AA at all, but rather I think it would greatly help their Pacific offerings.

Just took a Zipair flight within Asia today and LOT better then other low cost airlines in Asia.

Plane was full with mostly Japanese coming back from their tropical vacation. Since they can't afford to go to Hawaii anymore. They go to the Philippines. Which is better then Hawaii BTW.

it may or may not get approved but I can't even imagine how you could view AS joining the AA/JL TPAC JV as a bad thing for American? Going from last place in Asia to having the best TPAC hub partner possible in SEA? AA/AS/JL may not pass UA/NH anytime but it's easy to see that JV as equivalent to UA/NH in the next 5-6 years while Delta languishes in last place with no real power in the TPAC aside from LAX and SEA where they're half the size of Alaska.
Alaska has the best network on the West Coast. Add an Asia hub to the mix? geez. OneWorld would have incredible power and JVs in every corner of the globe.

AA would continue to use DFW for TPAC and some LAX but SEA is a perfect place for a north american Asia hub. It's why Delta tried so hard to get Alaska to join them in their venture then tried to push Alaska out of SEA.

AS joining AA and JL would be amazing for AA. AA doesn't need to fly too much to Asia if AS can do the bulk of the work in a JV. AA is perfectly strong in Latin America and Europe with great JV partners there.

How would that hurt AA? If anything, AS in the Trans-pacific JV would give AS' SEA-NRT strong feed and free up JAL to fly elsewhere with their SEA-NRT frequency or perhaps shift its US slots to fly SEA-HND. Add Hawaiian's existing slots on HNL-HND and I'm sure DL will leak even more on that non-performing route than today.

Unless AS plans on flying to HND or NRT from LAX, AA has minimum threat or damage from AS joining the JV. Its slots at JFK and DFW don't rely on connecting West Coast traffic, it has 2 slots at LAX where it is the top performer in LF and fare, and it doesn't even compete in the HNL-HND market.

Plus for AS that opens more opportunity - would they be able to make the SEA-KIX work that DL couldn't? This could be a big deal in SEA. I'd expect AS would try to get in the South Pacific JV as well.

There's some pretty questionable reasoning and facts here.

The strongest network on the West Coast is not Alaska, it's United. United's SFO hub is stronger and more relevant than Alaska's SEA hub, United has a moderate hub at LAX, not to mention United has upgauged significantly at SEA over the past few years, almost at 6% now, meanwhile Delta's % has remained stagnant.

Alaska has squanded the SFO/LAX hub gains from VX, for example, LAX is down almost 25% since the acquisiton and neither airport is trending up in terms of pax flown.

Next off, Delta/KE are still much larger than the AA/JAL JV. Despite Delta not having much diversified flying, they are the 3rd largest TPAC airline by passengers flown, and KE is 2nd. You also need to consider in this same timeframe, the Asiana acquisition for KE, which will boost that JV even further.

The AS addition is really about making up for the lack of TPAC flying from AA. For context, AA is smaller than PAL for TPAC. The combined AA/AS presence will roughly match JAL's TPAC volume in size in the next 5 to 6 years.

What AS really offers is boosted feed at SFO for JAL and LAX for AA/JAL, while offering another West Coast gateway in SEA.

I actually don't see the status quo changing that much UA/NH will remain far ahead of everyone, Delta/KE will hold in second, and AA/AS/JAL will try to keep up. In fact, it's because of this that the AA/AS/JAL JV would even get approved, otherwise too large of a shakeup would be grounds for denial.

the strongest SFO player is United. Alaska has hubs in ever major city on the West Coast and connects them all without a stop, unlike United. look at a route map.

Alaska's SEA hub is already bigger than the United SFO hub by some metrics and is in a better geographic place for Asia travel.

If you can't see how Alaska in the AA/JL JV will do wonders for oneworld presence to Asia, good luck to you. Delta's hub will perform even worse once Alaska starts Pacific flying and especially if they're in the AA/JL JV.

You're really quite hyperbolic.

The reality is that the only way for AS to enter the JV and get the regulatory approval is to make a case that it's necessary to keep up, but not create unfair competition.

Geography is great, but the reality is that yields matter more. SFO is just simply far more relevant. SEA has something like 1/3 or lessTPAC O&D demand of SFO.

If geography was so impactful, people would fly via ANC, but they don't. Alaska's secondary hubs on the West Coast don't matter because they won't be launching TPAC flights from them. It doesn't matter that you Alaska flies BOI to SAN, when they need to be flying BOI to SEA/SFO to connect over to Asia, which is why the only relevant comparisons are the West Coast to Asia gateways, not the secondary airports.

The AS addition will most definitely help the OW TPAC JV, but you cannot seriously expect it to elevate it to the drastic levels you're claiming it will. You would be Tim Dunn levels of delusion, if you think so.

🙂 Agree to disagree. AS in SEA is already bigger via departures than UA in SFO and yes. SEA has plenty of O&D. If you think demand from ANC is in anyway comparable to SEA? Really? Geography does matter when SEA is highly connected to the lower 48 states for connections. Of course The Bay Area has more demand vs SEA overall but that's why geography matters.

And again, I said over 5-6 years and Yes, I do think it would rival UA at SFO during that timeframe. Like I said, Alaska in SEA than United in SFO.

Resorting to insults so quickly doesn't make you look smart, it just makes you resort to insults vs what you did, ignore completely how you're wrong about the biggest west coast network, it belongs to Alaska, not United.

And secondary hubs do matter when AS, combined with AA will have better market penetration in SAN, secondary LA airports, PDX, and to a lesser degree, the easy connection to Bay Area secondary airports to SEA out of their preferred airports.

As usual, yolo better understands the industry than others but some important pieces are still being left out of this conversation.
The US DOJ has not allowed two US carriers to have JVs either with each other or on the same route for any period of time. That was the basis of the rejection of the NEA and also why the DOJ takes the approach of a one to one relationship between US and foreign carriers in JVs. JVs involve capacity planning, fare coordination, and revenue and/or profit sharing so requires deep insight into how each airline operates.
Also, JVs are based on how much capacity each airline puts into the JV. AA does not get 50% of the revenue or profits from the JL JV because it puts in far less of the capacity.
It is possible that the DOJ could allow AA and AS to be part of the same JV with JL but not for the same routes. SEA-Tokyo is both an O&D and a leg. It is most likely that AS would be part of the JL JV on the SEA-NRT leg and AA would not be allowed even though AA is part of the JL JV on the SEA-NRT leg today.
The beyond SEA or US gateways O&Ds are the issue and it is possible that the DOJ would approve the JV with AA/JL and AS for non- gateway O&Ds such as MCI or MCO on O&Ds that could be served by either AA or AS and then JL TPAC or completely on AA or AS to Tokyo. AA/JL is smaller than UA/NH in the LOCAL Tokyo market.
The DOJ could and likely will allow JV cooperation on the US to beyond gateway O&Ds as bilaterals allow.
The real issue w/ all of this buildup in Japan is that Japanese carriers are realizing that KE is on the verge of overtaking Japan’s role as the primary NE Asia connecting COUNTRY – a role Japan has traditionally held.
Japan’s two airport in Tokyo divides international traffic and siphons off the highest value Tokyo local revenue to HND. Japanese carriers as well as AA and UA are trying to save NRT’s function for legacy carriers by pushing connecting traffic through NRT. It will be increasingly challenging financially to make US-NRT legacy carrier flights work when the highest value local Tokyo traffic is increasingly being siphoned off to HND.
And DL is still the largest US carrier at HND based on traffic to the US. And Japan is part of the DL-KE JV.
UA is the largest carrier across the Pacific because of their presence to MNL, HKG and South along the Pacific Rim. DL and UA are essentially the same size to NE Asia – Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan and China – based on published schedules.
Adding in OZ’s capacity – which goes into KE’s bank accounts but is not part of the JV – DL/KE/OZ is comparable in size to UA/NH.
IN order to integrate OZ’s capacity into the KE JV, DL has to add flights on its own metal – but can do that anywhere on its widebody international system – as long as it doesn’t throw other JVs out of whack. In other words, DL capacity for the sum of all DL’s JVs has to grow by whatever capacity is added by all of its JV partners.
It isn’t clear what DL will add – some routes to Asia such as China and HKG aren’t part of any JVs for DL or any other US carrier – or if they will focus on places like India where DL does not and likely will not have a JV with an Indian carrier.

The bottom line is that adding AS to the JL JV is negative for AA because it forces some level of sharing of what AA had all to itself.
And let’s also note that AS has yet to load its ICN flight which makes it far less likely that it will happen – at least this year.

ZIPAIR's "business-lite" is almost perfectly tailored for me—I don't drink on planes, tend not to eat much either and will always choose internet over movies as my in-flight entertainment—but a flatbed seat is everything, and I'm excited to hopefully give ZIPAIR a try soon. I'm hoping this expansion brings some additional routes to the central and eastern US.

"The bottom line is that adding AS to the JL JV is negative for AA because it forces some level of sharing of what AA had all to itself."

It's not as if AA had anything major going on in the West Coast anyway. LAX expansion didn't pan out, SEA supposed-expansion didn't pan out and SFO..well, they've cut flights from there as well.

I say this is good for AA.

insomuch as AA intended to grow SEA as a hub but did not, there is nothing lost to them OTHER THAN being able to put their code on JL's SEA-NRT flight.
As hard as it is for some to see, it is AS that has won AA's inability to compete in the west. AA turned to AS to put its code on west coast flying that DL and UA can make work but AA cannot. The same thing is happening w/ SEA. DL asked AS to codeshare and feed DL's international flights; AS declined and DL started its own SEA hub. AA withdrew its LAX operation, wanted to move flights to SEA, and is now watching AS start international flights feeding its own and also joining AA's JVs.

just wait until AS wants into the TATL JV.

Would love to see some sort of service to Florida, either MCO or MIA. An East Asia nonstop is sorely needed!

I'm definitely the target customer for ZG as I value lie-flat comfort but am perfectly happy to BYO everything else. However, the one thing that has stopped me from booking them thus far, if anyone from the company is reading, is the absolutely draconian change/cancellation policy - in short, tickets being completely use it or lose it - and that's simply not a risk I'm willing to take when spending that kind of amount on tickets months out. I could understand issuing travel credits with some sort of fee, but no changes whatsoever is a non-starter for me.

I would love to see the Japanese carriers in Cebu; I recall that one of them had intentions to fly to Cebu (or was it Clark?)

and lets not forget TPA ! 🙂

That's already been tried.

Ryanair tried to charge for the lav in 2009, and protesting passengers FORCED them to change in the exact messy way you're imagining......

And if you aren't, the google "Ryanair piss-ins" and read for yourself.

while Delta languishes in last place with no real power in the TPAC aside from LAX and SEA where they're half the size of Alaska.

This is completely nonfactual.

Though you seem more interested in baiting Tim Dunn than you do in making statements that comport to numerical reality.

It’s clearly for the leisure market. I have done a return on ZG SJC-NRT. It’s generally 50% of the full service fare. Bring your own food, water, blanket and pillow. It’s fine for the fare the key of course is the use it or lose nature. For some extra $ you might be able to get some flexibility but it’s draconian.

Zipair got two key points in the presentation, adding 787-9 and increasing the number of full flat seats. Seems JAL Group sees a good market in the full flat seats.

I'd love some direct competition from New Zealand to Japan. Air New Zealand have a monopoly on this route and therefore the direct flights are expensive.

I believe JL will replace the old 787-9 with A359 and these 787-9 will be transfered to ZIPAIR.
Because the cabin of A359 is several meters longer than 787-9's, I hope JL will put 1 row of new first class.

Max genuinely has an obession with replying to Tim. If you see TD post 50 times on an article. You will see Max doing the exact same, replying back to him 50 times, in real-time.

It is still probably a niche market, but it must be somehow working for them, nevertheless. Zipair is increasing TPAC frequencies slowly, but surely. Interestingly enough, Air Premia, which is a very similar concept, is expanding its timetable out of ICN.
What surprises me is that they fly to the same destinations as JL. YVR, for example, hosts AC, ANA, JL, and Zipair (albeit non daily).
It would be interesting to know the actual passenger mix, i.e., are Japanese the main group, or Canadians/Americans on TPAC routes?

Most ( all) budget long haul routes tend to fail sooner or later. How has JAL managed to make it work?

I wonder if secondary destinations across Australia such as Cairns or Darwin would be on ZIPAIR’s radar?

I really don't know how the economics of this work. I've flown them a couple of times. I really doubt that not chucking a blanket on your business class seat or not installing a TV is what allows the economics of rock bottom long haul 'lie flat' seats to be viable. Is this a massively loss making operation? Be curious to understand how they're making any money.

Jetstar, Scoot, AirAsia? They haven’t failed.

They have recently introduced Flex Biz which offers a voucher on cancellation, though it's only valid for 180 days after issuance. (It may be possible to "chain" reservations to keep extending the lifetime but I haven't tried it.)

100% same for my family.

The management of JAL probably don't understand how business economics works either so you're not alone

you are clearly not as smart as you think you are or you would know that Japan to US traffic, by volume, is predominantly Japan originating.

The entire concept of low cost carriers is to grow the leisure component which has stagnated because of the strong dollar.

Japan is a demographically shrinking market so Japanese carriers are trying to grow their revenue while the Japanese government two Tokyo airport policy is moving NRT to a low cost carrier airport which will further accelerate the replacement of Tokyo by Seoul for TPAC connections.

If that voucher was valid for a year or 18 months, I'd be more inclined to use Zipair as a cash backup to my usual award flight searches, but there's no way I'm taking 2 trips to Japan in a span of 6 months with its current validity span.

I don't think JAL will want first class on so many aircraft though.

First class really only works for select markets. Even West Coast markets like SEA can't support FC. FC will be limited to the A350Ks afaik.

JALs success of Zip is based on banking on the uneducated who doesn't look at the bottom line. If you add up all the fees for seat selection, baggage allowances (carry on and check in) not to mention every juice, beer you drink, it basically adds up to a standard economy fare. Then they low key raise the price of JAL flights assuming a more luxury experience but it's lipstick on a pig. Don't fall for it.

Tim--can you provide a valid reference for your idea that DL wanted to codeshare with AS on TPAC flights but AS declined? That's not how I remember it. At the time, AS and DL were tightly affiliated and AS was thrilled with having a partner to feed a lot of international flights out of SEA. Then, DL tried to force AS to drop most of its other airline partners and become a DL vassal. (Part of the reason AS bought Virgin America was as a "poison pill" to fend off DL's acquisition attempts.). At some point (I can't remember the exact timeline), DL bean a lot more flights in Seattle itself, competing directly on AS's bread and butter routes, thinking they would bring AS to its knees. It didn't work out that way. For those of us based in SEA, AS has developed far more nonstop destinations than DL--and far more frequencies on most routes where they compete directly. By now, DL must be wondering what kind of bear they picked in AS. It will be interesting to see how well AS does with international long haul.

Please note that I have been a DL loyalist for decades. A lot of those miles were earned on AS, back when they were affiliated, including reciprocal FF benefits. These days, I tend to choose between DL and AS based on nonstop availability, price, and schedule. The "Battle for Seattle" continues to be interesting to watch.

Zip now has a 'Flex Biz' option which is very reasonable, allows for credit-based refund of 97% up until 2 weeks before the flight, and 80% within a week I think it is. The manner in which you request and then claim the credit to rebook is also a bit draconian, requiring multiple back-and-forths with customer service, but it works and within their predictions, they are very responsive (almost 48 full hours between cancellation and confirmed rebook using the credit/voucher)

It’s amazing for those who don’t need the extras. I just need a seat, Wi-Fi, and my backpack as I already have everything in Japan. Lie flat is an even better deal.

"The airline doesn’t have any personal TVs onboard, but instead has free Wi-Fi for all passengers."

Maybe its the millennial in me, but I would much rather have free wi-fi than seatback entertainment on every plane I fly. I'd rather be able to do whatever I want on my phone like watch YouTube or stream the movies/shows I want to watch rather than be forced into watching whatever the airline has provided, even if it is on a bigger screen.