Air Tahiti Nui is a lovely little airline, operating a fleet of four Boeing 787-9s from French Polynesia. I’ve always had pleasant flights on the airline (dating back to when the company operated Airbus A340-300s), though I can’t say I’ve put much thought into the carrier’s financials.
So it’s interesting to note that Air Tahiti Nui is reportedly considering making some major changes, in order to reduce losses. Let me explain…
In this post:
Air Tahiti Nui losing money on nearly all routes
For context, Air Tahiti Nui operates out of Faa’a International Airport (PPT), and flies to Auckland (AKL), Los Angeles (LAX), Paris (CDG), Seattle (SEA), and Tokyo Narita (NRT). The Paris service is operated as a continuation of the Los Angeles flight.
In 2024, the airline had an operating loss of around 2.8 billion XPF (27.3 million USD). That might not sound massive, but that was on revenue of 34.3 billion XPF (332.2 million USD). So a margin of around negative 8% isn’t exactly great.
What’s interesting is how performance breaks down by route. The Los Angeles route is the only one that’s profitable, as it generates around 1.1 billion XPF (10.7 million USD) in profits annually. Everything else is sort of a mess. Looking at 2024 performance:
- Seattle generated a loss of 1.68 billion XPF (16.3 million USD)
- Tokyo Narita generated a loss of 875 million XPF (8.5 million USD)
- Auckland generated a loss of 274 million XPF (2.7 million USD)
- Paris generated a loss of 212 million XPF (2.0 million USD)
As you can see, the Seattle service loses an absolutely massive amount of money in comparison to the rest of the network, while the Tokyo Narita service has an average load factor of under 50%.
Now, I should emphasize that Air Tahiti Nui is owned by the government of French Polynesia, and of course a major motivation of the airline is to bring tourists to the region. Despite that, it’s clear that the government isn’t happy with the level of losses, plus the constantly increasing debt, as the carrier’s cumulative deficit is now up to 22 billion XPF (214.9 million USD).
How could Air Tahiti Nui may update its network
So, how could Air Tahiti Nui improve its profitability? Strategy consulting firm Arthur D. Little has presented the airline board with a recommendation, which would basically see the airline completely transform its network.
The recommendation calls on the airline to cut its service to Seattle and Tokyo as soon as possible, given the huge losses. Meanwhile the service to Auckland and Paris is basically considered breakeven, so would be maintained.
The recommendation is for Air Tahiti Nui to instead launch flights to Honolulu (HNL), San Francisco (SFO), and Sydney (SYD). What’s the logic for that?
- Honolulu would be a shorter distance to fly, as it’s only 2,731 miles from Tahiti; in theory there could be more connectivity through Alaska and Hawaiian, though the geography isn’t necessarily ideal, since Honolulu is almost directly north of Tahiti
- Sydney would largely be about also competing more in selling tickets between Sydney and the West Coast of the United States; however, the airline flew to Sydney in the past, and the route lost money
- San Francisco has more origin & destination demand for Tahiti than Seattle does, but it’s also more competitive, with both French Bee and United operating in the market
The presentation also has some fleet planning recommendations, suggesting the airline either keep its fleet of four Boeing 787-9s, or instead switch to a fleet of around six Airbus aircraft, including four A330-900neos and two A321XLRs.
I don’t know what the solution here is, but a few thoughts:
- Given Air Tahiti Nui’s deficit issue, completely replacing its relatively modern fleet probably isn’t the way to go, and the airline should probably focus on what it can do with existing aircraft
- Being an airline based on a remote island with limited hotel capacity isn’t easy, since there’s always going to be a cap on how many potential tourists there are
- The competition from North America to French Polynesia is strong, between Air France, French Bee, Hawaiian, and United (Delta just canceled its Tahiti service)
- I’ve always felt like a merger and/or better integration between Air Tahiti Nui (the long haul carrier) and Air Tahiti (the regional carrier) would help out the airline, since it would give it a competitive advantage with people looking to reach their final destination in French Polynesia
Anyway, we’ll see how this all plays out, since ultimately the airline is owned by the government, and is there to promote French Polynesia tourism. So any network changes have to be carefully weighed, and factor in the impact they’ll have on tourism.
Bottom line
Air Tahiti Nui is losing money on every route it operates, except its service to Los Angeles. In particular, the airline is losing the most on its flights to Seattle and Tokyo Narita, while the flights to Auckland and Paris are delivering mild losses.
It looks like the airline is hoping to improve its financial performance, and this might include a full overhaul of its route network. One consulting firm recommends the airline cut its two very unprofitable routes, instead adding service to Honolulu, San Francisco, and Sydney.
It’s anyone’s guess how this plays out, though it does seem likely that at least the Seattle route will be cut sooner rather than later, since the losses on that route alone more than wipe out the profits of the carrier’s only lucrative route.
What do you make of Air Tahiti Nui’s financials, and what kind of a restructuring are you expecting?
Denver would be an exceptional choice to replace Seattle. 2024: Denver ranked 6th busiest airport in the world and 3rd busiest in North America, maintaining both positions for the second and fourth consecutive year, respectively. 787 capable of non-stop service. Though a United hub, they will not go head to head with the UA flight out of SFO. Also a Southwest hub, do a code share.
The main reason DEN is so busy is because of connecting traffic on UA and WN (mostly UA.) While a codeshare agreement with Southwest might be an interesting option for them, it would probably be better for them to do that on the West Coast.
I'm guessing that one of the big reasons that they're recommending this particular shakeup is also that they can do 3 shorter-distance routes instead of 2 longer ones. Doing DEN...
The main reason DEN is so busy is because of connecting traffic on UA and WN (mostly UA.) While a codeshare agreement with Southwest might be an interesting option for them, it would probably be better for them to do that on the West Coast.
I'm guessing that one of the big reasons that they're recommending this particular shakeup is also that they can do 3 shorter-distance routes instead of 2 longer ones. Doing DEN instead of SFO would likely negate that advantage. It's actually farther from PPT than SEA is.
I would LOVE to fly ATN from Australia. Currently the connection via Auckland is dodgy. We have friends in Tahiti so visit at least once a year via the Qantas/Air Tahiti Nui code share Brisbane-Auckland-Papeete. The Qantas connection in AKL cannot be relied upon to be on time, and with only 2 or 3 flights a week to Tahiti, we usually fly the day before and overnight in Auckland to be sure. Inconvenient.
The return...
I would LOVE to fly ATN from Australia. Currently the connection via Auckland is dodgy. We have friends in Tahiti so visit at least once a year via the Qantas/Air Tahiti Nui code share Brisbane-Auckland-Papeete. The Qantas connection in AKL cannot be relied upon to be on time, and with only 2 or 3 flights a week to Tahiti, we usually fly the day before and overnight in Auckland to be sure. Inconvenient.
The return usually has an easy three hour connection, but on our visit in May Qantas cancelled the return connection without warning - another night in AKL!
BTW Tahiti is truly wonderful, but freaking expensive. Arrival and departure at Papeete airport can be a bit of a zoo - basically a large unairconditioned shed with rammed security/passport. Leave plenty of time. But the islands are beautiful, the people friendly….we just hope everyone keeps going to Bora Bora (which is oversubscribed with tourists) and continue to ignore some of the gorgeous quieter islands.
A caveat: since Air Tahiti Nui changed from Airbus to B787, the danged Boeings seem to break down more often, so with only 4 planes, disruption is possible. Service in business has always been friendly though, and the food is good. And the coffee.
How about seasonal flights from Montreal. French speakers love to go places that speak french
Way too far for too small of a market. For comparison, YUL has fewer annual passengers than Nashville. Even YYZ probably wouldn't be enough traffic to support that long of a route, though, especially without an agreement with AC to provide feed.
I recently moved to the West Coast and have never been to any of the vacation spots that West Coasters prefer. When is a good time to visit Tahiti?
Should fly to Dallas or Phoenix and setup a bunch of AA codeshares for one stop to most of US that avoids LAX. That's better for connections than SEA.
Definitely axe the Seattle route. The Tokyo route is hard to axe mainly because I think Tahiti likes to have that link to East Asia. I don't know the frequency of the flights but if they can fly once a week to Tokyo and the remainder of its flights to Honolulu that might work.
Why they won't consider joining an alliance what would allow them to market properly, get feeder flights (in the US at least) is beyond me.
They have partnerships with both American and Alaska. Looks like the Alaska one isn't really doing much for them, though, given that loss on the SEA route. They also have partnerships with Japan Airlines and various others.
Shame they haven't considered South America, could make a lot linking SYD & AKL to SCL or BOG
Yields are almost certainly too low. If they can't make Tokyo or Seattle profitable, it's exceptionally unlikely that they'd be able to profitably do any route in South America. Far more price-sensitive market.
How about a 5th freedom route like PPTSINBKK or PPTSYDSIN
As much as I would love to see SYD added back to TN's network, IIRC back when they last served this route in circa 2009 it struggled to get load factors to crack 40%. A huge problem for French Polynesia as a destination seeking to attract Australian travelers is that you spend 8 hours flying over a host of closer and often cheaper destinations that carve a similar niche. Why would someone in Sydney go...
As much as I would love to see SYD added back to TN's network, IIRC back when they last served this route in circa 2009 it struggled to get load factors to crack 40%. A huge problem for French Polynesia as a destination seeking to attract Australian travelers is that you spend 8 hours flying over a host of closer and often cheaper destinations that carve a similar niche. Why would someone in Sydney go to Tahiti when they can be in New Caledonia or Vanuatu in about 3 hours, Fiji in 4, Samoa in 5 or the Cook Islands in 6? Only those who very specifically want to visit French Polynesia will make the journey. Is that enough people to profitably fill a 787 twice a week? Idk... But I'd be thrilled to be proven wrong
All excellent points, @MissingScurrah. But you forgot to mention the abysmal service aspect, which I have no doubt is a major turn-off. I flew them from Noumea to Sydney in about 2012 or 2013 on an a340. Maybe it's the French influence, but that airline, along with AirCalin are the ONLY airlines I've ever flown where ALL the surly cabin crew refused to smile even once to pax throughout the entire flight(!) Mon Dieu!
The airline needs to determine what they want to be. If their goal is just to be a gateway to Tahiti with value being measured as onsite tourism they need to find destinations that fill up the planes even at low yields.
If they are open to being a connecting hub between US and NZ/AU and get some fringe stopovers they need to work on their schedule. There's surely some interesting aircraft utilisation to...
The airline needs to determine what they want to be. If their goal is just to be a gateway to Tahiti with value being measured as onsite tourism they need to find destinations that fill up the planes even at low yields.
If they are open to being a connecting hub between US and NZ/AU and get some fringe stopovers they need to work on their schedule. There's surely some interesting aircraft utilisation to be had.
From a tourism point of view linking to Hawaii from Sydney has some merit for round the world travelers who want to properly visit the Pacific as they are in the region. The flight is fairly short so would use only one plane daily. Again, scheduling has to work.
This is about generating demand so it's about removing hurdles for traffic to flow in.
Just fly to LA, with 5th freedom to LON/PAR
A month ago used 57.5k American miles to fly LAX-CDG in business. Was fully aware that with six business seats on the 787 that it was a tight configuration, but got myself into the first row with more space in the footwells. Despite knowing all of that the service was excellent and the cabin crew really went above and beyond to make the passengers happy. Despite the lack of bedding managed to get some sleep....
A month ago used 57.5k American miles to fly LAX-CDG in business. Was fully aware that with six business seats on the 787 that it was a tight configuration, but got myself into the first row with more space in the footwells. Despite knowing all of that the service was excellent and the cabin crew really went above and beyond to make the passengers happy. Despite the lack of bedding managed to get some sleep. Food was surprisingly good, glassware and dishes nice. One small thing they could do would be to have mattress pads.
They should axe the Seattle route in favor of something more profitable.
They should update the business class seats.
Cutting the SEA route wouldn't be too bad, as there will always be options to the US on ATN and other airlines. But cutting PPT's only route to Japan, which might bring in high-yield tourism from that part of the world, not to mention valuable cargo, might not make much sense.
Maybe switching the CDG flight to operate via YVR would help as the pax would not have to clear customs and immigration and stay in the sterile transit area.
How is switching to A330s going to help them? The 787s are cutting edge, so why dump them? Too much capacity?
The A330NEO will allow them also operate the A321XLR with minimal additional cost as the two aircraft can be operated by the same pool of pilots.
The A330-900 (in the stage length Air Tahiti nui operates) can match the B787-9 in terms of fuel cost.
If they can get similar or better acquisition cost, the A330-900 will be great for them (getting a lease or buying a brand new aircraft is typically higher than the over 5yrs old crafts)
Makes sense
What a load of crap.
Hope they make it work keeping the spirit of their service. Thought the crew and soft product on the CDG route was outstanding. Felt like going back in time in a good way.
TN was getting something like 20% LFs on SEA-PPT
I’m booked SEA-PPT in November for about $700 round trip in economy. Thought I was getting a deal but that seems to be pretty much the standard price. Bid $1,600 for business on the outbound, sounds like it might have a good chance of success, hope it’s worth it. (Also bid around $900 on the return but may cancel that as it’s a daytime flight.
A vey looooong daytime flight, out of your circadian rhythm. Stick with the bid.
SFO is a rational pick, as they’d get more O/D without losing feeds from Alaska .
Isn’t Tahiti a dying destination with closed hotels and poor service these days?
Merging TN and VT would be tragic. You would be mixing a loss-leading airlines with one that is just breaking even, running the risk of sinking a regional airlines that has been doing OK for 50 years. Hence why it is not done. French Polynesia can do without TN, but not without VT.
Very different cost structure. Who on Earth advocates for the merging of United and Skywest?
The SEA service is tragic as...
Merging TN and VT would be tragic. You would be mixing a loss-leading airlines with one that is just breaking even, running the risk of sinking a regional airlines that has been doing OK for 50 years. Hence why it is not done. French Polynesia can do without TN, but not without VT.
Very different cost structure. Who on Earth advocates for the merging of United and Skywest?
The SEA service is tragic as it had great potential. However, after teh discontinuation of the CDG services through SEA, they changed timing which is now horrendous and prevent any kind of connection on either side on the PPT to SEA segment. So there is no point heading to a OW hub in SEA if zero connection can be done either side.
This is the usual shennigans of TN trying to force passengers to spend a night in Tahiti/ Papeete.
TN and VT should NOT be merged, for exactly the reason you state.
A nation (or in this case an "overseas department") of scattered islands requires a functional puddle-jumper service.
TN and VT do need a healthy codeshare arrangement though.
Isn't it already the same company though?
I searched New York to Paris flights the other day and was thoroughly baffled that the cheapest award flights were via LA using Tahiti Nui. Saying that I’m no longer baffled would be an overstatement, but this article does add some interesting context…
As a CFO my proposal would be: to discontinue SEA amd TYO asap. This would bring the airline back into profit zone.
Then, having stopped the bleeding, reconsider calmly AKL vs SYD.
Do not touch PPT-LAX-CDG which is profit making (dropping CDG may also adversely affect PPT-LAX).
CDG also exists as a political and business connection, as well as national pride. No chance that goes away.
Not only that, but the French Government maintains various forms of financial aid - particularly to French Polynesia - that one would think TN reaps some benefit from.
I like the idea of connecting SF and LA with SYD and AUK, with a free stopover in Tahiti. They can be the Iceland Air of the South Pacific!
I think Fiji Airways is already adopting that role with their service from many Australian destinations to Nadi connecting with their flights from the US West coast. The market demand may not be large enough to sustain 2 airlines both serving a similar purpose of serving secondary markets in Oceania with those in the US. Perhaps further collaboration between Air Tahiti Nui and Fiji Airways could be interesting. Maybe they could form a transpacific joint...
I think Fiji Airways is already adopting that role with their service from many Australian destinations to Nadi connecting with their flights from the US West coast. The market demand may not be large enough to sustain 2 airlines both serving a similar purpose of serving secondary markets in Oceania with those in the US. Perhaps further collaboration between Air Tahiti Nui and Fiji Airways could be interesting. Maybe they could form a transpacific joint venture of sorts with Qantas and AA as well
Yeah I did YVR-NAN(1 week stopover)-SYD-NAN-SFO last Nov and it was awesome.
I think a lot of US & AU travelers would do a pair like that for their vacation: pacific island + Australia/US. AU-US tickets already cost a lot & take a long time anyways, so that demographic has a low fruit to pick.
SEA sucks--I dislike that airport. I was just telling someone on reddit I'd pick SFO or LAX any...
Yeah I did YVR-NAN(1 week stopover)-SYD-NAN-SFO last Nov and it was awesome.
I think a lot of US & AU travelers would do a pair like that for their vacation: pacific island + Australia/US. AU-US tickets already cost a lot & take a long time anyways, so that demographic has a low fruit to pick.
SEA sucks--I dislike that airport. I was just telling someone on reddit I'd pick SFO or LAX any day over SEA for connecting to Asia or Oceania. Flying LAX-PPT tomorrow.
Wait a minute...I thought Seattle was the most premium transpacific hub? Or is that only when a certain carrier launches a route from there?
It's only premium when Alaska flies the routes. Not when Delta does it.
Not surprising. Look at how many miles they want to fly business class through Alaska Airlines program. It’s ridiculous. Them and Fiji can pound sand.
@Jacob, it’s 65k on Alaska. AA is 80k!
Flew SEA-PPT-SEA on Air Tahiti Nui this last May into June, in business using Alaska miles. The business cabin was half empty (as well as the economy cabin). Was very surprised. In speaking with the FAs they mentioned it is a common occurrence. One FA made the comment, "the LAX route is always full". I was also surprised they hadn't upsold economy passengers into business through cheap upgrades.
SEA used to be full when it was a thru flight to CDG. Most of the flight was onward connections