It’s entirely possible that this doesn’t materialize, but there’s reason to believe that Etihad Airways may be looking to return to the west coast of the United States.
In this post:
Etihad Abu Dhabi to Los Angeles flight returning?
From 2014 until 2020, Etihad Airways flew between Abu Dhabi and Los Angeles. That route ended up being cut, as the airline tried to increasingly focus on sustainable and profitable growth. However, there’s an indication that this route may be coming back.
AeroRoutes flags how during a recent OAG schedule filing, Gulf Air filed new codeshare flights operated by Etihad Airways (the two airlines have a partnership). The filing suggested that on June 13, 2024, Etihad would launch 3x weekly flights between Abu Dhabi (AUH) and Los Angeles (LAX) using Boeing 787-9s with the following schedule:
EY171 Abu Dhabi to Los Angeles departing 8:45AM arriving 2:25PM
EY170 Los Angeles to Abu Dhabi departing 4:55PM arriving 8:00PM (+1 day)
Now, the schedule filing has since been removed by Gulf Air, which suggests that at a minimum, Etihad isn’t prepared to announce this route just yet.
Is it a sure bet that Etihad will bring back its Abu Dhabi to Los Angeles route? Absolutely not. However, airlines also don’t just randomly file schedules that are based on nothing, especially when we’re talking about a codeshare on a partner. And this isn’t simply a refiling of some old schedule, since previously the airline never flew a 787 to Los Angeles.
If this route were to resume, it would be Etihad’s longest route, by far, at 8,390 miles.
Would Etihad returning to Los Angeles make sense?
Roughly a decade ago, Etihad Airways was on a massive growth spree, as the airline tried to directly take on Emirates. The airline flew everywhere and was simply focused on growth rather than profitability. I guess the government of Abu Dhabi got tired of that strategy, and then we saw the airline take a completely different approach, and instead focus on sustainability.
After shrinking considerably and returning to profitability, Etihad is now once again pursuing a slow and steady growth strategy. With that in mind, a few thoughts on the prospects of Etihad flying to Los Angeles:
- Of the destinations in the United States that Etihad has cut (Dallas, Los Angeles, and San Francisco), the Los Angeles route was the one that lasted the longest, suggesting that it was the least poorly performing of the routes, or at least that Etihad had the most reason to keep it around
- Etihad is once again growing its network to the United States, as the airline added Abu Dhabi to Boston flights, which is a route the airline hadn’t previously operated
- Etihad is growing considerably, as the airline is taking delivery of both Airbus A350s and Boeing 787s, so the airline would certainly have the planes to operate these routes
- I hate to say it, but I don’t really see how Etihad would make money flying to Los Angeles; this is an ultra long haul route, and it’s heavily reliant on connecting traffic to a lot of markets that aren’t particularly high yield in terms of RASM (revenue per air seat mile), and which are also competitive
- Even if I’m skeptical about the prospects of this route, at least Etihad has more fuel efficient jets than in the past for flying this route, which help with the economics; the 787-9 is much more fuel efficient than the 777-200LR or A340-500 that the airline flew in the market previously
- I am curious how comfortably within range this route is for the 787-9; while Qantas operates the longer Perth to London route, Qantas’ 787-9s are in a significantly less dense configuration, as Qantas has 236 seats, while Etihad has 299 seats
So I certainly could be wrong, but if I had to guess, I do think the Abu Dhabi to Los Angeles route will likely be brought back. If so, I can’t imagine it will be profitable for the airline, but who knows…
Bottom line
A recent schedule filing from Gulf Air suggests that Etihad Airways will resume its Abu Dhabi to Los Angeles route as of June 2024, with 3x weekly flights using Boeing 787s. This schedule listing was quickly removed, so it’s clear that the airline wasn’t ready to immediately put this flight on sale.
While the timing of the filing was clearly off, typically these kinds of updates don’t just come out of thin air, and presumably Gulf Air had some reason to believe that its partner Etihad would bring back this service.
With Etihad once again growing and having quite a few efficient wide body jets on order, perhaps this route will return as well. If the route does resume in June 2024, I imagine an announcement will be imminent…
What do you think — will Etihad resume its Abu Dhabi to Los Angeles flight?
Etihad has Arik De running their revenue team now, which includes network. If you know him and his track record, you can expect to see a steady stream of aggressive expansion. He's also paired up with Antonoaldo Neves, his former CEO at TAP - so undoubtedly that is a blueprint you can look at as well.
Will this undo the rationalisation of the Tony Douglas years? Time will tell, but conservative growth is not the style of the current team at Etihad.
How micromanaged do you think they'll be by the government though?
I'm sure the gov appreciates the Douglas era having stemmed the bleeding, but I'm equally curious as to how much sleep they lose..... due to the cultural affront of not having the biggest/best/flashiest new toys, compared to Dubai/Qatar/etc.
Having met Arik a few times, he is one the best minds out there. He was not only at TAP with Antonoaldo, but was also behind Aeroméxico and WestJet network and revenue. However, I don’t think he will expand LAX. See his track record at TAP. He sent the 321-LR’s to ramp up frequencies to places like Boston and Newark, than go for new destinations. If I am a betting man, I would see him...
Having met Arik a few times, he is one the best minds out there. He was not only at TAP with Antonoaldo, but was also behind Aeroméxico and WestJet network and revenue. However, I don’t think he will expand LAX. See his track record at TAP. He sent the 321-LR’s to ramp up frequencies to places like Boston and Newark, than go for new destinations. If I am a betting man, I would see him keep focusing on frequency additions in North America. Look what’s happened in Europe. Almost all markets are getting a second flight. More than LAX, perhaps we will see a second daily IAD or ORD.
You didn’t hear this from me but are you ready for the A380 to Toronto?
Eithad Airlines should fly the Airbus A350 to LAX.
Small correction: EY was operating the 77W to LAX and had been doing so for a while. Obviously too big a plane for the route especially during COVID; I’m confident that the economics of the 787 will make LAX viable considering how long EY flew to LAX during the pandemic. For what it’s worth, Etihad’s digital signpost is up at LAX’s curbside.
Sure, though for the overwhelming majority of their time here, EY flew the 77L to LAX. 77W only came in at the latter stages, and IINM, wasn't even daily when they pulled the plug. Don't recall them ever flying the A345 here.
They commenced service w/ the A345 before switching to the 77L.
Ah, you're right.
Just dug through some of the announcements: the first 3weeks June 2013 were operated by the A345. 772LR took over in July 2013.
*2014. Was on the inaugural flight 6/1/14
Could we please get a trip report from Japan? You know, an actual report on staying in hotels and traveling around Japan?
I'd be cool with that! I live in So Cal and have yet to fly Etihad out of LAX as their availability was tough to nab.
Ben - Curious why you think EY flying LAX-AUH won't work, but it works for Turkish, Qatar, Emirates, and Saudi. If they want to make AUH a connecting hub similar to DXB and DOH, they need flights to more destinations. There is likely a sufficient Persian and Indian population in LA to feed into EY's flights in Western/Central/South Asia.
@ NateNate -- A couple of thoughts. First of all, just because the airlines you mention fly those routes, doesn't necessarily mean that they're making money with them. Saudia is not even profitable as an airline, for example.
Regardless, one major disadvantage of Etihad is that the carrier's 787-9s just aren't in a very premium configuration. Most of Etihad's 787-9s have 28 business class seats, and no first class or premium economy. Compare that to...
@ NateNate -- A couple of thoughts. First of all, just because the airlines you mention fly those routes, doesn't necessarily mean that they're making money with them. Saudia is not even profitable as an airline, for example.
Regardless, one major disadvantage of Etihad is that the carrier's 787-9s just aren't in a very premium configuration. Most of Etihad's 787-9s have 28 business class seats, and no first class or premium economy. Compare that to Emirates' A380s, which have 90 first and business class seats. If you're going to make money on these routes, it's going to be in premium cabins.
And to talk about economy economics for a second, it's common to see $1,000 fares from LAX to Central and Southeast Asia via the Middle East. Those are 20,000 mile journeys, and the revenue generated with those kinds of tickets doesn't even nearly cover the costs of operating flights like that.
Lastly, Etihad lacks the connectivity and scale of airlines like Emirates and Turkish, which is another competitive disadvantage.
The biggest reason it wouldnt work? There are few (relatively) Indians in the LA area. If you cant have Indians/ dont have enough of them, then you need Persians/ Iranians/ Armenians to make it work. LA has plenty of those, but Etihad doesnt fly to Iran or Armenia. So it's just not going to work except for certain high demand periods of the year when Etihad can get whatever spill traffic there is to India...
The biggest reason it wouldnt work? There are few (relatively) Indians in the LA area. If you cant have Indians/ dont have enough of them, then you need Persians/ Iranians/ Armenians to make it work. LA has plenty of those, but Etihad doesnt fly to Iran or Armenia. So it's just not going to work except for certain high demand periods of the year when Etihad can get whatever spill traffic there is to India (small percentage) OR the local Emiratis go to LA, which they do in summer, but not during other times of the year.
Ah thats a good point and disappointing. I plan travel for my parents out of LAX and it would be great if they had another business class option where miles could be used.
I checked Wikipedia, and Etihad no longer flies to Iran. So it won’t gain many customers from LA’s Persian community.
As an aside, the market for travel to Iran from LA’s Persian community is likely to go down in the years ahead, absent some drastic change in Iran. Those who left Iran as young adults in the first few years after the Revolution are now in their 60s and 70s. If they had parents...
I checked Wikipedia, and Etihad no longer flies to Iran. So it won’t gain many customers from LA’s Persian community.
As an aside, the market for travel to Iran from LA’s Persian community is likely to go down in the years ahead, absent some drastic change in Iran. Those who left Iran as young adults in the first few years after the Revolution are now in their 60s and 70s. If they had parents who stayed in Iran, most of those parents have passed away by now. Not as much reason for that generation to go back for visits anymore.
Apparently EY will stop using their A350s on ultra long-haul due to various limitations and is planning to use their B777 as replacement. Any truth to this?
Source?
It’s an RR engine thing. Tim Clark went on record this week and said the reason he’s not ordering the A350-1000 is the engines. The Trent-XWB 97 is really struggling in sandy climates.
There's gotta be more to it than that... else he wouldn't have ordered 200+ units of a widebody whose engines (1) have yet to be tested in in-service conditions anywhere, much less a desert; and (2) whose engines have been modified/PIPed three times since flight trials began.
My guess is that Airbus hasn't (yet) given him the price he wants, in exchange for on-wing time.
"My guess is that Airbus hasn't (yet) given him the price he wants, in exchange for on-wing time."
More likely to be Rolls-Royce who makes those guarantees and pricing concessions, not Airbus. I do agree that that's likely what is delaying them from announcing an order for the -1000 just yet, though this article makes it seem like an order is eventually going to happen, despite all the tough talk.
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/emirates-airline-rules-out-immediate-airbus-a350-order-2023-11-14/
"My guess is that Airbus hasn't (yet) given him the price he wants, in exchange for on-wing time."
More likely to be Rolls-Royce who makes those guarantees and pricing concessions, not Airbus. I do agree that that's likely what is delaying them from announcing an order for the -1000 just yet, though this article makes it seem like an order is eventually going to happen, despite all the tough talk.
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/emirates-airline-rules-out-immediate-airbus-a350-order-2023-11-14/
Wish they’d give SFO another try, seeing as Qatar entered during the pandemic & seems to have made it work! (I actually preferred my Etihad business class experience over even QSuites personally)