United Airlines has just announced its major international expansion for 2026. The airline has been teasing that we can expect new routes, and the details are now out. United has by far the most interesting route network of any US carrier (United flies to the most destinations and most countries of any US carrier), so I always look forward to seeing what creative new routes the airline comes up with.
Admittedly United is fairly limited in terms of its potential growth, given that the airline isn’t taking delivery of many new long haul aircraft. So I’d say these additions are exciting, but perhaps not quite as splashy as last year’s new routes to Greenland, Mongolia, and beyond.
In this post:
United Airlines launching several new international routes
In 2026, United Airlines is adding service to four new international destinations, and is adding two new long haul routes to existing international destinations. So it’s a bit less exciting than last summer, when United added service to eight new international destinations, but I also wasn’t expecting that level of growth (for what it’s worth, all of last year’s new destinations are being brought back in 2026, which is impressive).
Here’s how Patrick Quayle, United’s SVP of Global Network Planning and Alliances, describes this:
“United has an unmatched international network, and we pride ourselves on connecting our customers to unique, trendsetting destinations no other U.S. airline serves. With the addition of these new flights and the return of all of our new routes from last year, United now flies to 46 cities across the Atlantic – more than any other airline – and is the clear flag carrier of the U.S.”
So let’s start with the four routes being added to all-new destinations, and then we’ll look at two new routes to existing destinations.
United’s Newark (EWR) to Bari, Italy (BRI) route
As of May 1, 2026, United will launch 4x weekly summer seasonal service to Bari, Italy, United will be the only US airline flying to Bari. United plans to use a Boeing 767-300ER for the 4,515-mile route.
Bari serves as the gateway to the Puglia region, allowing travelers to explore nearby hilltop towns, the beaches of the Adriatic Sea, and more. Bari also has one of the largest ports on the Adriatic Sea, so this also allows travelers to connect by boat to Albania, Croatia, Greece, and Beyond. In 2026, United will offer up to 15 daily flights to Italy, across six destinations.
United’s Newark (EWR) to Glasgow, Scotland (GLA) route
As of May 8, 2026, United will launch daily summer seasonal service to Glasgow, Scotland. United will be the only US airline flying to Glasgow. United plans to use a Boeing 737 MAX 8 for the 3,228-mile route.
Glasgow is Scotland’s biggest city, and is known for museum, architecture, and historic hubs.
United’s Newark (EWR) to Santiago de Compostela, Spain (SCQ) route
As of May 22, 2026, United will launch 3x weekly summer seasonal service to Santiago de Compostela, Spain. United will be the only US airline flying to Santiago de Compostela. United plans to use a Boeing 737 MAX 8 for the 3,310-mile route.
Santiago de Compostela is the capital of the Galicia region, near Spain’s northwest coast. The area has a rich history with cathedrals, Medieval architecture, and it’s the endpoint for the Camino de Santiago pilgrimage. In 2026, United will offer service to six destinations in Spain.
United’s Newark (EWR) to Split, Croatia (SPU) route
As of April 30, 2026, United will launch 3x weekly summer seasonal service to Split, Croatia. United will be the only US airline flying to Split. United plans to use a Boeing 767-300ER for the 4,406-mile route.
Split is known for its beautiful historic sites, including the ancient Roman Diocletian’s Palace, the Cathedral of Saint Dominus, and more. It’s also known for its beautiful promenade and harbor. This will be United’s second route to Croatia, complementing service to Dubrovnik.
United’s Washington (IAD) to Reykjavik, Iceland (KEF) route
As of May 21, 2026, United will launch daily summer seasonal service between Washington Dulles and Reykjavik, complementing existing service out of Chicago and Newark. United plans to use a Boeing 757-200 for the 2,799-mile route.
Iceland is of course a popular adventure destination, and the goal is to provide service to the airport through more hubs.
United’s Newark (EWR) to Seoul, South Korea (ICN) route
As of September 4, 2026, United will launch daily year round service between Newark and Seoul Incheon, complementing existing twice daily service out of San Francisco. United plans to use a Boeing 787-9 for the 6,898-mile route.
Since United currently only flies to Seoul from the West Coast, the intent is to offer more convenient connections for those coming from elsewhere. Seoul is known for its food, Gwangjang Market, and of course K-pop.
My take on United Airlines’ latest international expansion
I wasn’t expecting this to be the most exciting year ever when it comes to United’s international expansion, for the simple reason that United isn’t taking delivery of many new long haul aircraft at the moment, due to Boeing 787 delivery delays.
So unless you cancel existing routes, that makes it difficult to expand too much. United seems to be finding success with the routes it previously added, which is why there’s not much room for growth.
With that in mind, I think it’s really cool how United is adding service to four new transatlantic markets. However, the fact that two of the four routes are being served by Boeing 737 MAXs definitely leaves something to be desired in terms of passenger experience.
I do find it noteworthy that Delta recently announced new routes to Malta (MLA) and Olbia (OLB), and Delta is the first US airline to fly to those destinations. Despite that, United isn’t replicating those routes, and serving those markets as well. It really shows how constrained United must be in terms of new aircraft.
So yeah, I’d put this latest expansion in the category of being cool, but certainly not the most exciting, by United’s (very high) standards.
Bottom line
United Airlines has announced plans to launch six new international routes in 2026. This includes service to four new European destinations, plus additional routes to two existing international destinations. Of note is that United will be the only US carrier to serve these four new destinations. Then again, two of the routes are being served by Boeing 737s, so in terms of passenger experience, that leaves a bit to be desired.
What do you make of United’s latest international expansion?
Those flights sound intensely uncomfortable (red-eye to mainland Europe with United level of amenities). The unusual destinations might be compelling enough for the flight home (when it's not a red-eye) but def not on the way out.
UA network planning led by Patrick Quayle is brilliant and if you doubt it just look at the reaction here and in the media. Advantage UA. It's just a matter of time.
what happens on aviation social media has zero connection w/ the real world.
What UA reports next week for its 3rd quarter financials is what matters to investors.
What the DOT and private companies report about airline customer service related issues is what matters to customers.
Using domestic configured narrowbody aircraft for TATL routes is uniquely UA among global carriers. If it really made sense, then a whole lot of other carriers would be doing...
what happens on aviation social media has zero connection w/ the real world.
What UA reports next week for its 3rd quarter financials is what matters to investors.
What the DOT and private companies report about airline customer service related issues is what matters to customers.
Using domestic configured narrowbody aircraft for TATL routes is uniquely UA among global carriers. If it really made sense, then a whole lot of other carriers would be doing it - but they aren't.
It is what you expect from Ryanair or Southwest, not a global legacy carrier that says it is focused on premium revenue which a domestic configured aircraft cannot deliver anywhere close to what a widebody or even the XLR can do.
Then why do the Big 3 sell Basic Economy tickets?
they sell them AS A PART or a larger portfolio of products. AA, DL and UA could not exist solely on basic economy products but offer them because their basic economy product is better than the ULCCs.
By using the MAX on TATL aircraft, it is taking part of its product portfolio and not using the best parts in terms of revenue generation according to UA's own statements about where its profits come from.
Other...
they sell them AS A PART or a larger portfolio of products. AA, DL and UA could not exist solely on basic economy products but offer them because their basic economy product is better than the ULCCs.
By using the MAX on TATL aircraft, it is taking part of its product portfolio and not using the best parts in terms of revenue generation according to UA's own statements about where its profits come from.
Other than AS with its sole planned SEA-KEF flight, there are virtually no legacy carrier domestically configured 7+ hour international flights for the very good reason that premium revenue IS what is giving legacy carriers an advantage and these types of MAX international flights leave an opportunity to win that revenue on the table.
TD says, "they sell them AS A PART or a larger portfolio of products."
Exactly. And narrow body flights to Western European thin, lower-yielding markets is no different. UA is matching the offering to the market, but nice try. UA's wide body fleet and international wide body premium offerings dwarfs the competition and that lead is increasing. It's just a matter of time.
again, no other legacy carrier on either side of the Atlantic (or Pacific) flies domestic configured narrowbody aircraft on flights that are as long as what other carriers use widebodies for.
When the majority do something, you have to legitimately ask what the one sees that the rest don't.
I tend to think the "99" are right.
It isn't worth brand and service confusion on top of the much poorer economics of operating...
again, no other legacy carrier on either side of the Atlantic (or Pacific) flies domestic configured narrowbody aircraft on flights that are as long as what other carriers use widebodies for.
When the majority do something, you have to legitimately ask what the one sees that the rest don't.
I tend to think the "99" are right.
It isn't worth brand and service confusion on top of the much poorer economics of operating narrowbodies on international routes.
We might get some average fare information in time for some of these markets but we do know the costs for narrowbody aircraft and they just do not compare as favorably to widebodies on a per passenger basis.
the entire UA philosophy is to chase economy traffic at summer fare levels and hope no one knows that the service is completely different than on a UA widebody.
TD says, "the entire UA philosophy is to chase economy traffic at summer fare levels"
And yet UA dwarfs the competition in the number of wide-body aircraft, the number of premium seats on each of those aircraft and their UA's lead is increasing rapidly so your assertion is demonstrably and completely incorrect. UA leads in TATL, dwarfs DL & AA combined in TPAC and is #2 and growing in TLAT while DL is level to...
TD says, "the entire UA philosophy is to chase economy traffic at summer fare levels"
And yet UA dwarfs the competition in the number of wide-body aircraft, the number of premium seats on each of those aircraft and their UA's lead is increasing rapidly so your assertion is demonstrably and completely incorrect. UA leads in TATL, dwarfs DL & AA combined in TPAC and is #2 and growing in TLAT while DL is level to shrining over the last decade.
It's just a matter of time.
just say it.
AA and DL added more new widebody capacity with their fall route announcements than UA which is using 757s with the worst business class product in the US carrier fleet and 737s which do not even a premium economy cabin comparable to what UA has on its widebodies, let alone this vaunted Polaris product you love to talk about.
My statement stands. UA's route announcements increasingly are about carrying economy traffic on...
just say it.
AA and DL added more new widebody capacity with their fall route announcements than UA which is using 757s with the worst business class product in the US carrier fleet and 737s which do not even a premium economy cabin comparable to what UA has on its widebodies, let alone this vaunted Polaris product you love to talk about.
My statement stands. UA's route announcements increasingly are about carrying economy traffic on planes that could and should be flying domestic routes.
and, no UA is not out in front on capacity growth. DL has added about the same amount of capacity in absolute terms as UA and that has been true for over a decade.
When DL is relatively small in something like TPAC you either turn to “size doesn’t matter” or short term growth (from tiny to a little less tiny). When DL is big like in ATL then size matters.
Not persuasive in the least, but nice try though. It’s just a matter of time.
Bari will be out in no time. Split maybe will live a bit longer.....
I don't want to brag, or anything, but I've got three destinations from the picture clues right... See Ben's first post
yeah... you did stay up all night and get it right.
here's your cookie... and a pat on the head.
A cup of coffee too?
it's truly surreal how much you let a UA new routes post make you lose your ever-loving mind, Timothy Dunn
It's amazing the ability I have to engage you, Max.
the joke is on you. You ARE the joke.
says the guy that ALWAYS HAS to reply to me ;) but cute try, loser.
and you can't grasp that I reply to you because you are more fixated w/ me than the topic - and when you do discuss the topic, you rarely get the facts straight because you are more driven by trying to prove me wrong.
Your participation in this sub-thread perfectly proves my point.
Are you familiar with the whole concept of psychological projection? You should check it out.
You know I was just browsing flights on Air Europa (UX), and they now offer connections through South America with COPA and Avianca. With United now serving more Spanish destinations than any other US carrier (if I'm not wrong), and Turkish being a potential new investor in UX, I see a way they could join Star Alliance.
If anything it'd be better than their current position in Skyteam, with little integration with AF/KL and...
You know I was just browsing flights on Air Europa (UX), and they now offer connections through South America with COPA and Avianca. With United now serving more Spanish destinations than any other US carrier (if I'm not wrong), and Turkish being a potential new investor in UX, I see a way they could join Star Alliance.
If anything it'd be better than their current position in Skyteam, with little integration with AF/KL and awful, awful mile redemption value in anything other than their own metal, since then south american passengers would be able to accrue miles on regional flights on AV/CM
Avianca are in the process of getting closer to GOL, with any luck that can help pull the latter into *A which would be a real game changer in the region.
Not sure about UX, particularly since they compete with TAP on lots of city pairs- if anything, *A may be meaner than ST when it comes to member integration (e.g. two SQ lounge experiences of mine: being told off for daring to ask...
Avianca are in the process of getting closer to GOL, with any luck that can help pull the latter into *A which would be a real game changer in the region.
Not sure about UX, particularly since they compete with TAP on lots of city pairs- if anything, *A may be meaner than ST when it comes to member integration (e.g. two SQ lounge experiences of mine: being told off for daring to ask them to print out a 2-page COVID test document as a passenger on TP, being informed that they had no way of speaking to the gate to confirm the status of my AI flight).
Was hoping for Budapest. Even AA will fly there.
I used to live in Santiago de Compostela, and I would go to NYC a few times a year to visit family. This route would have been convenient.
Kind of surprised by the EWR-ICN route. New York to Seoul is already a very crowded market. I figured if they'd add flights to Seoul it'd be out of Chicago. Only 1 daily Korean Air flight to compete with and better located for connections from much of the midwest and south.
Asiana, UA's formwr Star Alliance partner, is being absorbed into Korean Air by next year. KE has been limited frm flying all of OZ's JFK slots due to antitrust issues. UA likely wants a share of the East Coast market that leaves on the table.
United should install lieflat in these 737-MAXs like FlyDubai has. Call it Polaris MIN on the MAX.
Yeah it's hard to get excited about narrowbody recliners on a 7 hour TATL flight. Fwiw, I guess these must be leisure oriented routes, where the capacity is on the economy side.
I wonder how they'll brand it, either as Premium Plus or United Business, where they'll still get United Club access and other basic perks.
JetBlue's narrowbody product seems like the right choice for routes like these.
They'll be branded as Premium Economy.
Patrick Quayle said there isn't the demand for lie flat seats in markets like GLA and SCQ.
For those who want a lie flat, pax can still take a relatively short widebody TATL flight, though they'll likely get 3-4 hours of sleep, land in what will feel like the middle of the night, wait a couple of hours for a connecting flight, then take their narrowbody connection.
Or they...
They'll be branded as Premium Economy.
Patrick Quayle said there isn't the demand for lie flat seats in markets like GLA and SCQ.
For those who want a lie flat, pax can still take a relatively short widebody TATL flight, though they'll likely get 3-4 hours of sleep, land in what will feel like the middle of the night, wait a couple of hours for a connecting flight, then take their narrowbody connection.
Or they can take this nonstop. All UA/Star pax will have the option.
they can brand them as premium economy but they are domestic first class seats which are significantly less than a premium economy seat.
literally the same exact seat in most W cabins as most domestic F minus the footrest. Dude, give it up. You sound like an idiot
"Minus the footrest."
Kinda a notable part of a premium economy seat.
It IS a domestic first class seat, Max.
Just say it.
But then you are part of the chorus that argues incessantly about DL's 767-300ER Delta One seat while having amnesia about UA's 2X2 Polaris seat on the 757s which fly all the way to Ireland, the UK and to continental Europe.
Now this and there is all the proof in the...
"Minus the footrest."
Kinda a notable part of a premium economy seat.
It IS a domestic first class seat, Max.
Just say it.
But then you are part of the chorus that argues incessantly about DL's 767-300ER Delta One seat while having amnesia about UA's 2X2 Polaris seat on the 757s which fly all the way to Ireland, the UK and to continental Europe.
Now this and there is all the proof in the world that UA does not have and is not interested in a consistent premium product.
and don't you dare bring up the 2 remaining ex-Latam 350s in their original configuration unless you also note that 2/3 of the Delta One seats on those aircraft DO have lie flat direct aisle access compared to 50% of UA's 757s and ZERO percent of their MAXs which also fly to continental Europe.
you're one of the dumbest people on the planet, Tim. That you can't understand they're selling Domestic F as premium economy and somehow think a missing footrest on the exact same seat is comparable to no-aisle access and no wifi on the LA A350s at Delta.
Don't you dare bring up? lol. God, what a waste of a day for you and so entirely amusingly predictable and sad.
"Significantly less than a premium economy seat"... uhh what?
They have an inch less recline & pitch yes, but also 1.5 inches more width, better power and no middle seat and an identical screen. They also don't have the footrest (which I personally hate anyway but I imagine some folks like them). I don't really get the point TD.
You are simply incapable of admitting that 25% of the seat is missing - the footrest and don't you dare say it is the same as what UA offers on its widebodies in premium economy. We know better
It is a domestic narrowbody first class seat.
Just say it instead of incessantly trying to put lipstick on a pig.
oh god, Tim. you're such a loser. Of course it's a domestic first seat lmao. It's a max8. But Premium economy on a widebody is also literally a domestic first class seat with a foot rest.
25% of the seat? lol. I wish you could realize how much of a laughing stock you are to everyone, except your own fake profiles.
the engines hanging on the wing have absolutely nothing to do with the type of seat that can be installed in the cabin.
You and others argue endlessly how great UA's Polaris seat is despite the fact that there are no all direct aisle narrowbody Polaris cabins in service.
This isn't even a Premium Economy seat of the same caliber as UA installs on its widebodies.
You and others simply cannot admit that UA's...
the engines hanging on the wing have absolutely nothing to do with the type of seat that can be installed in the cabin.
You and others argue endlessly how great UA's Polaris seat is despite the fact that there are no all direct aisle narrowbody Polaris cabins in service.
This isn't even a Premium Economy seat of the same caliber as UA installs on its widebodies.
You and others simply cannot admit that UA's pursuit of narrowbody international flying results right now in a competitively inferior product compared to other airlines' widebody products.
The reason I have such a field day w/ people like you, Max, is because you incessantly refuse to accept reality which anyone w/ half a brain can see but you argue incessantly nonetheless because you are more driven by trying to prove me wrong than admit that my point is valid.
UA has said the MAX 8 will be part of their TATL fleet which means that, even when the XLRs begin service, UA will have a very different and inferior product to not just UA's widebody aircraft but also compared to both AA and DL and many foreign carriers which simply will not cheapen their brand by flying a domestic configured aircraft on an international flight over 7 hours.
JetBlow is never the right choice for anything.
I'll take an extra 2" of seat width and no middle seat over a foot rest 100 times out of 100. Foot rests are useless for anyone of above average height anyway. TD is grasping at straws as usual.
I think Glasgow is a relaunch, as it was served in 2019.
I still don't understand why Glasgow and Edinburgh didn't build a combined airport. Glasgow is closer to EDI than Manhattan to JFK.
Central Glasgow - EDI = 57 km as the crow flies
Times Square - JFK = 21 km as the crow flies
Boomer idiocy at its finest.
I think a combined airport between Glasgow and Edinburgh would still have served well.
Google Maps says Glasgow city center to Edinburgh city center are some 75km apart. So a combined airport anywhere 30-40km from both cities sounds like a good idea ... William Wallace Scotland International Airport. Or Maria Stuart ...
That's not correct. Edinburgh Airport is 40 miles from Glasgow's George Square, JFK is 17 miles from Times Square. Nonetheless, a combined airport makes a lot of sense given the cities are so close. The odd thing is despite the closeness of Edinburgh and Glasgow, they feel far apart in terms of culture, vive, even the accent.
Closer in distance doesn’t mean closer in travel time.
Lots of capacity being added to ICN, not just from the DL/KE thing but also from Alaska and United too. EWR - ICN is going to be interesting though, curious to see how it competes with all the JFK traffic to/from ICN. Customers win either way though
There is a Korean densely populated area Fort Lee just north of EWR about half an hour, which should be a decent choice.
Glasgow is a great choice, but I'm a bit surprised that Manchester or Birmingham wasn't considered. UA used to fly to BHX before COVID, so it would be nice if more non-London cities in England get USA links.
Instead of offering more service to Scotland, would love to see some love shown to England outside of Manchester and London. Would be great to have some connection to Birmingham/Midlands or the Southwest.
I remember flying back from SCQ 7-8 years ago and there was literally no lounge available at the airport, and I know several people based in Galicia (as far North as Coruña) who usually fly from Porto because the choice of airlines, fares and destinations is on a completely different level.
Like its main competitors, UA's route network has enormous gaps in Europe and adding this sort of tertiary destination is amusing when they...
I remember flying back from SCQ 7-8 years ago and there was literally no lounge available at the airport, and I know several people based in Galicia (as far North as Coruña) who usually fly from Porto because the choice of airlines, fares and destinations is on a completely different level.
Like its main competitors, UA's route network has enormous gaps in Europe and adding this sort of tertiary destination is amusing when they don't fly to Düsseldorf, IST (the biggest city in Europe!), Poland (population 37 million!), or Romania.
As much as I'd love to see WAW in UA's network, LOT already covers UA's hubs from WAW (with some additional flights from KRK and RZE), and it benefits from a far lower cost base. Hard to compete with that, I think. Even though the hard product is far inferior.
but LOT is also updating their fleet, especially the business class. So hopefully that will be not as much of a gap between Polaris and LOT-C.
Question is, do you really need a flight to DUS, when you have a dozen flights from Frankfurt and highspeed rail running by the hour from Fraport?
IST is covered by Turkish, and as with LOT probably from a much lower cost structure ...
@itsamoeder , these are just a few examples. You could also say LYS is near enough Geneva, LHR is less than a hundred miles from Birmingham,
OTP has countless flights on LH Group airlines etc.
We've said it again, and I think it should be obvious to anyone who looks at this with an open mind. The real issue isn't cost structures or the quality of business class on one competitor or another...
@itsamoeder , these are just a few examples. You could also say LYS is near enough Geneva, LHR is less than a hundred miles from Birmingham,
OTP has countless flights on LH Group airlines etc.
We've said it again, and I think it should be obvious to anyone who looks at this with an open mind. The real issue isn't cost structures or the quality of business class on one competitor or another (plus, in any event, seasonal Y leisure/VFR traffic during peak summer probably isn't much less profitable than premium cabins), but the total lack of interest by the US airlines in marketing their services to other points of sale... Unless of course that in itself is the product of cost structures and/or corporate strategies which mean that it's there's no point in trying to sell flight tickets to passengers who aren't in a position to sign up for the lucrative US-issued airline credit cards.
They'd be able to get connecting pax from across N. America, just like LOT presumably grab transatlantic traffic from places like KSC, SKG, ZAG etc. Even if they don't feel able to compete at WAW, an airline that can sustain long-hauls to Puglia, MLA, and Galicia shouldn't have a problem finding enough demand to KRK or even GDN.
LOT does NOT cover anything from the majority of of UA's hubs (LO only flies to 3 UA Hubs, as IAD has been canceled), one West Coast a few days a week, and two East Coast daily. LO was going to launch WAW-SFO in 2020, but we know what happened then. This route is so comically underserved it is begging for a flight. I know of seven companies that in aggregate alone would fill most,...
LOT does NOT cover anything from the majority of of UA's hubs (LO only flies to 3 UA Hubs, as IAD has been canceled), one West Coast a few days a week, and two East Coast daily. LO was going to launch WAW-SFO in 2020, but we know what happened then. This route is so comically underserved it is begging for a flight. I know of seven companies that in aggregate alone would fill most, if not all, of a UA 767 J and PE every Sunday and Thursday, let alone additional companies.
The time is now. United, please start the SFO-WAW route ASAP, if even just a few days a week.
And no, we don't want a route to KRK, RZE, POZ, GDN, WRO, or RDO. These airports all have very rudimentary and distanced connectivity to their cities. For context, during rush hour, it can be slower to get from KRK to certain parts of the city of Krakow then the fastest a passenger train has traveled from Downtown Warsaw to Downtown Krakow (yes, current route times are a bit slower, but the point stands).
If LCJ would have gotten their act together a decade ago, that would have been a solid centralized option, especially now with the central rail hub in Lodz nearing completion, but the airport owners have really let customers down there and would need to put in a good amount of work to make it as easy as WAW.
Istambul is in Turkey, mostly considered a middle eastern country, not Europe... Please....
Could whoever does consider Turkey to be in the Middle East do us a favour and tell us what countries are in the Near East? While they're at it, they could also confirm that the country of Cyprus (whose westernmost part sits too the East of IST) is Middle Eastern too.
*to the East, not too
What was the explanation of the Morse Code clues from yesterday? I think the only one the commenters here figured out was CLYDE since Glasgow is on the River Clyde.
https://youtu.be/kY3ZnSbOOh4?si=uHnmz5rC9_ssH7dg
They put out a video with the destinations decided.
GLA is a bit confusing as EDI is a far better and larger airport (at least until AGS upgrades are complete in ~'27), even if Glasgow is intended destination as it's just +30 minutes more. Most US tourists as part of Edinburgh-Glasgow-Highlands loop trip are going to spend more days in Edinburgh. Glasgow has attracted some non-London corporate population, like JPMorgan, but likely not enough to support direct flight premium.
Perhaps could be appealing...
GLA is a bit confusing as EDI is a far better and larger airport (at least until AGS upgrades are complete in ~'27), even if Glasgow is intended destination as it's just +30 minutes more. Most US tourists as part of Edinburgh-Glasgow-Highlands loop trip are going to spend more days in Edinburgh. Glasgow has attracted some non-London corporate population, like JPMorgan, but likely not enough to support direct flight premium.
Perhaps could be appealing if it's a morning eastbound departure with an afternoon westbound, or if you can open-jaw between EDI/GLA to avoid backtracking on a Highlands trip, or it's notably cheaper than EDI pricing.
Bari, Split, SCQ are primarily “Ryanair airports” so I assume these new routes have also been sweetened by subsidies. All are good tourist destinations so I’m sure you can fill a few planes a week given the size of US market.
The 737s are brutal but there are plenty of longer 737 flights (8h TAS-LHR anyone?) and passengers survive them… I guess some people are just after absolute lowest prices and others don’t check what...
Bari, Split, SCQ are primarily “Ryanair airports” so I assume these new routes have also been sweetened by subsidies. All are good tourist destinations so I’m sure you can fill a few planes a week given the size of US market.
The 737s are brutal but there are plenty of longer 737 flights (8h TAS-LHR anyone?) and passengers survive them… I guess some people are just after absolute lowest prices and others don’t check what they book… maybe even some headed for Santiago de Chile will end up in Santiago de Compostella ;)
The Europe adds are whatever... I'm going to assume the Max8 ones will become A321xlr routes when those plans come online.
The real interesting one is them finally doing EWR-ICN. Never understood why this route wasn't there pre-Covid/Russia closure. Always wondered what was taking them so long, especially after the writing was on the wall with the OZ/KE merger.
Huge Korean population in NJ, including quite a few corporates. High income immigrant community as...
The Europe adds are whatever... I'm going to assume the Max8 ones will become A321xlr routes when those plans come online.
The real interesting one is them finally doing EWR-ICN. Never understood why this route wasn't there pre-Covid/Russia closure. Always wondered what was taking them so long, especially after the writing was on the wall with the OZ/KE merger.
Huge Korean population in NJ, including quite a few corporates. High income immigrant community as well, which si the exact situation that has made their India flights so good for so long. Glad they're entering the fight on NYC-SEL
Yeah, this was a big miss on their part, losing a lot of ground to competitors. Samsung NA HQ is very close to EWR, a few exits on the Turnpike. And so is the heavy concentration of Korean population in Bergen county. The demand is there, for sure.
I get how UA wants more dots on the map. But EWR- Bari and Split don't really make a lot of sense. CLE-FRA would make far more sense and more far more money as its fully untapped market, with large demand. And both ends are big *alliance bases and business cities. Bari and Split seem more for show than practicality. How much leisure traffic would be coming from Bari and Split to the US these...
I get how UA wants more dots on the map. But EWR- Bari and Split don't really make a lot of sense. CLE-FRA would make far more sense and more far more money as its fully untapped market, with large demand. And both ends are big *alliance bases and business cities. Bari and Split seem more for show than practicality. How much leisure traffic would be coming from Bari and Split to the US these days? The US is becoming increasingly hostile and less desirable for foreigners, and its only getting worse. Business routes like CLE-FRA are the smartest ways to expand right now. EWR-ICN is a good route and a good example of something that makes sense.
you are missing the fundamental premise of these in that they are not targeted toward Europe originating traffic.
I see that. But an airline makes more money if it can originate pax from both ends of a route (and I don't mean the originating pax on the European side being returning Americans). Cleveland-Frankfurt would have originating pax on both sides of the route. EWR-BRI and EWR-SPU would mostly be EWR outbound pax.
Good point, but I guess they are creating demand. I would now want to take this flight since I have Bari and Split on my bucket list. I recently took AA to Naples. AFAIK Naples is not a good connecting hub. Most passengers were O&D travelers, and in October the flight had every single seat occupied, on a week day. J and PE packed. In regards to CLE-FRA. maybe UA is letting LH take it, just like they recently did for STL.
United right now only flies to FRA out of its hubs (and even then LAX doesn't have a flight), so it's hard to see non-hub CLE getting one. Also UA is in joint venture with Lufthansa, which seems much more likely to add such a route if there really is the business demand you speak of (I'm skeptical). LH flies to FRA fo STL and AUS, for example, which are metro areas somewhat similar to...
United right now only flies to FRA out of its hubs (and even then LAX doesn't have a flight), so it's hard to see non-hub CLE getting one. Also UA is in joint venture with Lufthansa, which seems much more likely to add such a route if there really is the business demand you speak of (I'm skeptical). LH flies to FRA fo STL and AUS, for example, which are metro areas somewhat similar to Cleveland in population and economic importance (though both have larger populations and GDPs).
I would think CLE is bigger than STL and AUS in terms of GDP and population. You can't rely on government numbers for this because 1/3 of CLE's numbers are not in the "CLE MSA" they're put in the "Akron MSA" which is really part of Greater Cleveland. People who live in the Akron MSA use CLE's primary airport (Hopkins). (A few may use a little local airport, CAK, but the main airport is CLE)....
I would think CLE is bigger than STL and AUS in terms of GDP and population. You can't rely on government numbers for this because 1/3 of CLE's numbers are not in the "CLE MSA" they're put in the "Akron MSA" which is really part of Greater Cleveland. People who live in the Akron MSA use CLE's primary airport (Hopkins). (A few may use a little local airport, CAK, but the main airport is CLE). CLE's air population is around 5M--not sure what STL's or AUS's is but I know they're not as large. The route could be code-shared with LH, as there would be some travel beyond FRA as well. CLE-FRA makes more sense than CLE-MUC.
Bob, as someone who lived in Canton for a bit, you are so full of crap it dribbles out of your ears. Everyone about fifteen miles north of Akron and points south prefers CAK. They tolerate CLE.
Cleveland sucks, Cleveland sucks, Cleveland sucks, Cleveland sucks
uh huh....if you "lived" in Canton---past tense---and have since moved outta there, sounds like Canton and its tiny airport isn't all is cracked up to be....and you clearly have some cleveland issue.....
With respect, why would United launch an international flight like that from Cleveland? It looks like they only fly to hubs and Florida/Mexico vacation spots from Cleveland.
American carriers, right now, see the most opportunity in adding leisure destinations for US customers. Bari and Split from EWR, where United can connect customers from across the country, make much more sense.
There's an appeal to non-stop flights to these secondary / tertiary destinations. Delta and United pursue them. AA does not. Or, if AA does, it's via DFW or Philadelphia. One of a few reasons AA lost my business.
Actor Martin Sheen / Ramón Gerard Antonio Estévez's father was from Galicia . It is a nice region.
For me the most surprising part is UA starting EWR-ICN. Who knew UA would start NYC-ICN before DL started the route?
UA going 3 daily EWR-TLV is a close second, even though DL has the partnership with LY.
DL's JFK-ICN will be more premium!
United is finally adding a second city in E. Asia from the eastern US; DL has at least service to Tokyo and Seoul from ATL, DTW, and MSP and Shanghai from DTW.
DL's JV partner operates two large widebodies/day from JFK to ICN; OZ operates even more. DL will certainly add LAX and JFK to ICN in time.
UA's addition of EWR-ICN on top of Air Premia shows that the ICN market is plenty...
United is finally adding a second city in E. Asia from the eastern US; DL has at least service to Tokyo and Seoul from ATL, DTW, and MSP and Shanghai from DTW.
DL's JV partner operates two large widebodies/day from JFK to ICN; OZ operates even more. DL will certainly add LAX and JFK to ICN in time.
UA's addition of EWR-ICN on top of Air Premia shows that the ICN market is plenty competitive which means that DL and KE are free to continue adding capacity.
DL and LY do not have a JV but, again, having UA as the largest US carrier to Israel makes it all the more likely that DL will pursue a JV. and LY does serve EWR as well as JFK, something UA can't say.
Tim that’s such a bad take - and actually a hypocritical one - when DL launched LAX-HKG you seemed to say it’s bad for UAL but now that everyone is coming for DL’s lunch for the hub one of DL’s partners it’s good for DL? I don’t think you understand how competition and demand work? If there is increased demand and all your competitors take it that’s bad for you. Seems like DL is going...
Tim that’s such a bad take - and actually a hypocritical one - when DL launched LAX-HKG you seemed to say it’s bad for UAL but now that everyone is coming for DL’s lunch for the hub one of DL’s partners it’s good for DL? I don’t think you understand how competition and demand work? If there is increased demand and all your competitors take it that’s bad for you. Seems like DL is going to be fighting for its life there with AS also now flying there from a Delta hub city.
oh that's right. And Delta flies ZERO flights from the East Coast (Only ATL people thinks ATL is in the league of DC, Philly, NYC, or Boston).
Zero flights on Delta from JFK or Boston to Asia.
ATL is definitely in the league of Philly, nice sneak lol.
The good people of Atlanta don't deserve to be denigrated like that. Your points about no JFK/BOS Asia flights can stand without subjective opinions about ATL.
andy and max
as usual, you two prove that you cannot engage in a debate w/o distorting and manipulating what I wrote.
Absolutely nowhere did I say that DL gains by UA adding EWR-ICN service. in reality, there are some unique aspects of the NYC market to each airport. EWR did not have the level of service to S. Korea or other parts of E. Asia that JFK has.
UA's biggest target w/...
andy and max
as usual, you two prove that you cannot engage in a debate w/o distorting and manipulating what I wrote.
Absolutely nowhere did I say that DL gains by UA adding EWR-ICN service. in reality, there are some unique aspects of the NYC market to each airport. EWR did not have the level of service to S. Korea or other parts of E. Asia that JFK has.
UA's biggest target w/ this is Air Premia, not DL, KE or OZ.
UA will be flying a fraction of the capacity of the DL-KE JV not just from NYC but across their network. It's amazing how you two love to tout the power of UA's JVs but are unable to admit that DL and KE - and the capacity OZ is flying which will be either eliminated or matched by DL capacity - is far larger to S. Korea or any other E Asia market than UA has with its JV w/ NH to Japan.
and precisely nobody said anything about ATL being a coastal city; GA is a coastal state and GA is considered part of the E. Coast.
What does matter is that ATL has the second largest amount of TATL capacity of any US city - behind NYC but well above all of UA's hubs except for EWR.
As much as you love to talk about UA's EWR hub, the reason they have to pour so much into it for international is because they have no other E. Coast hub that comes anywhere near close to what DL has as part of its city E. Coast hub network.
UA has already long since given up its presence in the NYC domestic market in order to fail to match what DL has in TATL E. Coast networks
DL simply has a better E. Coast network and a better balance of domestic and international out of all 3 hubs, the total of which exceeds what UA has.
And DL doesn't have to use domestic configured narrowbodies to bulk up its size across the Atlantic.
Those are simple facts whether you like them or not.
Just so TD doesn't think I'm twisting his words..."UA has already long since given up its presence in the NYC domestic market"... checks NYC airport stats for August Domestic passengers: UA 2.2M, DL 2.5M, AA & B6 combines is about 2.2M, ahhh yes, UAL has definitely given up on domestic NYC. I'd also add that UAL does this with only 2 airports. I'd also say that the DL and UA pax domestically are growing at...
Just so TD doesn't think I'm twisting his words..."UA has already long since given up its presence in the NYC domestic market"... checks NYC airport stats for August Domestic passengers: UA 2.2M, DL 2.5M, AA & B6 combines is about 2.2M, ahhh yes, UAL has definitely given up on domestic NYC. I'd also add that UAL does this with only 2 airports. I'd also say that the DL and UA pax domestically are growing at a similar clip (both up about 80k YoY) - so how is this giving up on NYC? These are simple facts whether you like them or not Tim.
Also yes I'm totally sure UA is targeting Air Premia a low cost airline with no business class, no alliance and *checks notes*... 8 aircraft? And totally not their number 1 competitor in the world with a massive hub JV here. None of us have said that the DL KE JV is beaten in capacity to Korea by UA? We are just admiring that once again UA is trying to take on a DL JV head on.
Also you keep saying that Atlanta is this amazing connection hub for TATL - that's great, it literally has the connectivity because Delta hubbed there and has worked with the city of Atlanta consistently to maintain its control of the airport (no shade, all the airlines do it) - the problem is no one really wants to connect in Atlanta, people only do it because they want to fly Delta - which is fine, clearly it works for Delta, just weird to be touting Atlanta as this huge advantage for Delta, when no customer sees it that way. I mean United says that about Newark, I also don't think it is a great connection hub (Honestly the only great connection hubs that people actually like in the US are Denver and SFO, Some like Philly and Dulles I suppose but neither are great in my eyes)
@Andy, isn't it funny that Timmy hasn't quoted his beloved PANYNJ dashboard in some time the second the stats showed UA effectively recovering to normal after the April and May mess?
But thank you for doing so. And fully agree, for anyone to state that UAs main competitor for their ICN route is Air Premia is so delusional, one of the more stunning TD takez.
I HAVE quoted PANYNJ stats and Andy uses those very stats. Like many other issues, I HAVE shaped the discussion.
UA carries a much higher percentage of traffic as international than DL or other carriers; DL along w/ AA and B6 serve all THREE NYC airports w. domestic flights.
If everyone works w/ their local airports to maximize their use, then how is it that DL has managed to build the world's largest airport and...
I HAVE quoted PANYNJ stats and Andy uses those very stats. Like many other issues, I HAVE shaped the discussion.
UA carries a much higher percentage of traffic as international than DL or other carriers; DL along w/ AA and B6 serve all THREE NYC airports w. domestic flights.
If everyone works w/ their local airports to maximize their use, then how is it that DL has managed to build the world's largest airport and hub at ATL? They made it work.
And all you can do is make excuses for the reality that UA is more interested in sending domestic configured aircraft on TATL flights than recognize that UA is far from first place in the NYC domestic market.
UA"s route announcement was a let down to those that anticipated much and in light of AA and DL's TATL announcements and also an indictment of the fanclub that thinks that UA is going to just keep growing, growing, growing.
They aren't. they have proven they are more interested in putting dots on a route map w/ domestic configured narrowbody aircraft more than pursue revenue.
and if you don't realize that Air Premia is the ONLY airline that is flying EWR to ICN then you really shouldn't be having this discussion.
if you want to talk about UA competing w/ KE and OZ, then tell us the percentage of capacity UA will have in the NYC-ICN market, then don't forget to mention that UA will have a small double digit percentage of capaicty in the market.
Completely inconsequential
and the mass retirement of UA's old widebodies seems to be just around the corner.
@Tim... what a circuitous load of nonsense.
you mean facts that you don't agree with, so you call them nonsense.
Feel free to tell us what you disagree w/ and we can debate them.
UA will be a minor player in the NYC-ICN market.
ATL is the 3rd largest TATL gateway behind UA at EWR and DL at JFK.
DL simply does not need to force as much international connecting traffic thru NYC as UA does.
DL is the largest domestic...
you mean facts that you don't agree with, so you call them nonsense.
Feel free to tell us what you disagree w/ and we can debate them.
UA will be a minor player in the NYC-ICN market.
ATL is the 3rd largest TATL gateway behind UA at EWR and DL at JFK.
DL simply does not need to force as much international connecting traffic thru NYC as UA does.
DL is the largest domestic carrier in NYC. It is clear that UA is more interested in flying to secondary and tertiary international markets on domestic configured narrowbodies than competing in the domestic market from NYC.
"UA will be a minor player in the NYC-ICN market."
100% true but also irrelevant. By that logic, DL should cut its JFK-FRA/ZRH/MAD flights.
"ATL is the 3rd largest TATL gateway behind UA at EWR and DL at JFK."
Even if this is true, I would hazard #4 and #5 are UA at IAD and ORD. But again, kind of irrelevant
"DL simply does not need to force as much international connecting traffic thru...
"UA will be a minor player in the NYC-ICN market."
100% true but also irrelevant. By that logic, DL should cut its JFK-FRA/ZRH/MAD flights.
"ATL is the 3rd largest TATL gateway behind UA at EWR and DL at JFK."
Even if this is true, I would hazard #4 and #5 are UA at IAD and ORD. But again, kind of irrelevant
"DL simply does not need to force as much international connecting traffic thru NYC as UA does."
EWR is primarily O&D. If anything, IAD is their main connecting TATL hub.
"DL is the largest domestic carrier in NYC. It is clear that UA is more interested in flying to secondary and tertiary international markets on domestic configured narrowbodies than competing in the domestic market from NYC."
I guess true, but also may be meaningless. If they can make more with that B7M8 flying to Glasgow than sending it to Charlottesville or whatever, then that's the better decision. I dont care if DL has a higher share of the NYC domestic market. I can guarantee you UA would not trade its setup in EWR for the marginally better domestic catchment that DL gets in their split operation.
And going back to your previous one. Yeah, im well aware the only current airline flying EWR-ICN is Air Premia. But to say that is what UA is trying to compete with is still just wrong. Emirates is the only other airline flying EWR-ATH, but that doesn't mean UA is only competing with them vs also the ones flying JFK-ATH
Daniel
UA's international presence at ORD is quite small compared to the size of its domestic operation and compared to its coastal hubs.
DL is a far larger international operation for DL than ORD has at either ORD or DEN. IAH has a larger international operation because of the narrowbody international operations to Latin America.
And DL is by far the largest carrier from the Midwest not just domestically but also internationally because...
Daniel
UA's international presence at ORD is quite small compared to the size of its domestic operation and compared to its coastal hubs.
DL is a far larger international operation for DL than ORD has at either ORD or DEN. IAH has a larger international operation because of the narrowbody international operations to Latin America.
And DL is by far the largest carrier from the Midwest not just domestically but also internationally because of its dual DTW and MSP hub strategy. DL has far more international flights from those two hubs than UA has or ever will have from ORD.
As noted, they could have added ICN from ORD but did so from EWR; DL flies to Tokyo and Seoul from both DTW and MSP and PVG from DTW. UA serves precisely one city in E. Asia - Tokyo - from Chicago.
@Tim, you're literally arguing against bunch of points I didn't make.
re:/ connecting hubs at the east coast (from EU/*A perspective): Dulles sucks, these huge people mover shuttles are so inefficient. EWR connection was fine but that's 13 years ago, other than that EWR was usually a destination for me. YYZ is a great connection airport but not exactly east coast.
ATL is way too far in the south to be considered "east coast hub".
I didn't say Northeast.
MIA is also an east coast hub, itsa
And you can far more predictably make an hour connection in ATL and even MIA or CLT or even IAD but one hour outbound international connection in EWR is playing w/ fire.
Daniel,
feel free to post the connecting percentage of UA TATL traffic at EWR.
I can absolutely assure you it is NOT even majority local NYC traffic and...
I didn't say Northeast.
MIA is also an east coast hub, itsa
And you can far more predictably make an hour connection in ATL and even MIA or CLT or even IAD but one hour outbound international connection in EWR is playing w/ fire.
Daniel,
feel free to post the connecting percentage of UA TATL traffic at EWR.
I can absolutely assure you it is NOT even majority local NYC traffic and esp. to secondary and tertiary cities like Bari and Split and smaller cities of Spain.
EWR is absolutely a connecting hub.
UA is using domestic aircraft for connections from a hub that is heavily constrained by capacity - made worse after UA horribly mishandled a route runway rebuilding project - while the majority of DL's east coast connecting traffic flows over ATL leaving JFK and BOS for much higher percentages of local traffic.
and ATL pulls connecting TATL traffic from across the west coast, the entire southern tier, and large portions of the Midwest.
DL just doesn't fly narrowbodies from ATL to Europe - any part of it.
but then neither does AA from CLT, PHL, or DFW.
Narrowbody TATL flights to Ireland, the UK and continental Europe is a UA thing.
Using MAXs to fly from the US to continental Europe is the stuff of Ryanair and Southwest.... nowhere near premium.
and yet it is clear that the MAX will be part of UA's TATL fleet well into the future.
Does UA just forget that IAH exists?
This year looks like they forgot ORD exists too :(
I think ORD is tapped out until some of the construction is finished. Between getting stuck in the penalty box and excessively long taxis, ORD is tough to travel through right now.
IAH - Madrid is long overdue
Yes, Its a shame, Its my favorite airport to connect. I live in Merida-MID Mexico, and one of the few options we have.
They don´t even have a flight to Paris-CDG, they had many years ago!
They do in Air France to be fair (IAH) but yeah I miss the old flight. UA is getting a lot of new gates in the B north IAH expansion so give it another year. I'd like to see CME added and Cali.
Love the 'new' MID I have an office in Merida so go there a few times a year. Lovely place la ciudad blanca!
Well, precisely I took that flight AF from ARN-CDG to IAH on the A350, with the new Business Class, and We love it, of course, later, we took UA to MID. Actually AF often has good level for rewards (60,000-80,000) from different European cities to IAH.
Thanks for the reply, and If you happen to need any help or advise in Merida,
Please let me know, Im Andrew Molina, [email protected]
IAH will likely get a lot of new routes late next year when Terminal B is finished. With all the added gates , pretty new terminal etc etc .
Wish they would fly to more destinations from IAD. Isn't EWR having capacity issues?
They tried IAD-BER two years ago or so, but didn't workout. TBH, from my Germany-perspective: rather connect in EWR than IAD, and if IAD is the destination, prefer to fly B747/A380 by LH
Glasgow on a 737 is weird. There is a lot of American premium demand to Scotland. J on the 757s to EDI is almost always expensive and full.
Apart from Turnberry, all the golf courses are on the east coast of Scotland. The two advantages Glasgow does have it's right next to Loch Lomond and it's a lot more convenient to the English lakes if you don't drive.
West Coast also has the nice isles and better whisky. Admittedly a lot of American tourists do 2 days in Edi + , ignoring Glasgow's existence.
Glasgow is ugly compared to Edinburgh
Glasgow feels a much more vibrant city than Edinburgh. Edinburgh has a nice veneer to it but there's not a lot of *there* there once you scratch the surface. Glasgow feels more lived in and authentic. Lovely city.
That said, flying that long on a 73 max sounds like a violation of the geneva convention, so I'll probably just stick with o'hare's direct to Edinburgh and catch the train over.
And I'll probably stick to O'Hare's directs to London and take LNER/Avanti so I get real Polaris :-)
That's why I think it makes sense. Glasgow and Edinburgh are close enough that people going to the region are transiting to EDI and then going on their way. I guess it's closer enough to EWR that the 737 can work.
Weird new routes but low risk enough. I don't understand Glasgow at all - why fly a 737 when you can fly Delta to Edinburgh on a 767. Glasgow and Edinburgh are an hour away by train. I personally like Glasgow a lot, but Edinburgh is the tourist draw.
Are they trying to do some kind of Split / Bari vacation package? Fly into one, take the overnight ferry over fly out of the other?...
Weird new routes but low risk enough. I don't understand Glasgow at all - why fly a 737 when you can fly Delta to Edinburgh on a 767. Glasgow and Edinburgh are an hour away by train. I personally like Glasgow a lot, but Edinburgh is the tourist draw.
Are they trying to do some kind of Split / Bari vacation package? Fly into one, take the overnight ferry over fly out of the other? I mean Split has certainly seen its increased share of tourism, but Bari is a bit of a stretch. They are literally touting access to Croatia / Albania / Greece by boat as part of the marketing, but they also are scaling back their Athens flights. So...
Seoul... if I was going to go transpacific from the East Coast of the US on a 787, I'd take the Air Premia flight from EWR versus United - 35" of legroom in economy, right? Or 42" in Premium Economy? But really hard to pass up the A380 from JFK on Korean - it's such a great flight, and would choose the A350 / 777s that Korean/Asiana also flies to JFK over the 787 any day to go transpacific on a flight of that length.
Northwest corner of Spain? Can't imagine there's a lot of demand for that at all, but low risk with the Max 8 and they seem to fly to a lot of dots on Spain's map, and already flying a bunch to Portugal's coast right below. If it works for them I guess.
Iceland - whatever. Icelandair has 3x summer daily from IAD/BWI, if United wants to make a play for some of that demand, I mean... sure, why not challenge that exciting Icelandair/Southwest partnership (rolls eyes). Low risk.
Not a great surprise they are also cutting back on EWR-FRA - hard to compete with their partners Lufthansa, Condor and SQ which all fly into JFK.
All in all, meh. Unless they had something real to announce, they could have done this on a non-earnings day for DL, as TD said the other day. No great surprise that the Delta headline this morning is "Delta’s profit forecast tops estimates, buoyed by higher fares and resilient luxury demand". UA knew that, tried to steal some thunder, but this just looks "mid".
GLA I get at least experimentally. They've already got 2x daily EWR-EDI plus daily ORD-EDI and IAD-EDI all on 757s through the summer. If they suspect they can manage more traffic to Scotland in the summer months I can appreciate why they might try a EWR-GLA over say a 3rd daily EWR-EDI. It helps with connectivity to the west coast and Highlands, plus creates a reason to pick UA over competitors for originating traffic in...
GLA I get at least experimentally. They've already got 2x daily EWR-EDI plus daily ORD-EDI and IAD-EDI all on 757s through the summer. If they suspect they can manage more traffic to Scotland in the summer months I can appreciate why they might try a EWR-GLA over say a 3rd daily EWR-EDI. It helps with connectivity to the west coast and Highlands, plus creates a reason to pick UA over competitors for originating traffic in Scotland's west. UA used to operate both EDI and GLA simultaneously from EWR in the 2010s before consolidating at EDI, but back then it was daily to EDI and a few times a week to GLA. I'm also curious as to whether GLA is providing any subsidies to UA to operate this route, ever since WestJet consolidated their Scotland ops at EDI they've been without any North American connectivity not supplied by a charter/leisure airline (TUI and Air Transat), so I can imagine why they'd be so keen to attract the return of a mainline carrier.
Obviously just riding the coattails of Global Airlines. Although even Global flew to JFK! ;-)
Summer seasonal route, will add capacity for Glaswegians and GLA's catchment area to fly across during the Summer holidays to the USA, most of whom will connect to Florida and a few to Las Vegas or the West Coast, rather than travel to EDI, or potentially MAN (different school holiday periods compared to England).
Anecdotal but there seems to be a lot of demand to Puglia the last couple of summers. I went in and out of Brindisi but certainly would have preferred the direct to Bari versus the United-ITA connection in Rome.
Yikes. Domestic config MAX 8's on transatlantic flights. Hard pass.
Some people will prefer a nonstop to Glasgow.
If you don’t, you can take a widebody to a large city, get a few hours of sleep on the plane, then make a connection on a narrowbody to GLA.
Something for everyone.
not my cup of tea either but it's really just the XLR without a lie flat seat. They'll just sell economy and premium economy which is honestly probably perfect for Glasgow.
uh, no.
a MAX is not an A321NEO.
and not having a lie flat seat IS a big deal esp. for a carrier that has talked endlessly about going after the premium market.
MAX 8 TATL markets are all about dots on a route map w/ lower quality revenue.
even the high J 763 is the wrong airplane; UA will not command a fare premium to justify the much higher costs.
UA is out of airplanes and is throwing whatever they have to keep growing.
dude. Chill out. It's a narrow body selling premium economy and economy. Like I said, a perfect match for the actual premium demand out of GLA. And very low risk.
Are you really going to spend your entire day crying about UA's sexy new route announcements?
Yeah your comment makes no sense, this flight is about as long as most transcontinental flights and is clearly designed as a tourist market entry. I don’t think people will care that much when the First class seat is sold as a premium economy.
UA, with an order for 500 aircraft, with A321XLR deliveries starting next year, with a steady stream of 787 deliveries (soon giving them a fleet of over 200 787s), is out of planes? lol
The 757s will soon be replaced by A321XLRs, complete with Polaris suites and Premium Economy
The 737 MAX 8s serve cities DL doesn't even serve at all. UA gives a choice of flying nonstop to a destination (where UA has shown...
UA, with an order for 500 aircraft, with A321XLR deliveries starting next year, with a steady stream of 787 deliveries (soon giving them a fleet of over 200 787s), is out of planes? lol
The 757s will soon be replaced by A321XLRs, complete with Polaris suites and Premium Economy
The 737 MAX 8s serve cities DL doesn't even serve at all. UA gives a choice of flying nonstop to a destination (where UA has shown they get a premium) or of taking a widebody to a larger city before making a connection. Apparently enough people want the nonstop to make it worthwhile.
Meanwhile DL has no appropriate aircraft to make these destinations work. When their 767s are all retired, they'll really be in a bind, with the A330 being their smallest plane to fly TATL.
DL will make you take a TATL flight from NYC, where you'll get approximately 3 hours of sleep, landing at approximately 2am, NYC time, before waiting a few hours for a narrowbody connection. DL give you no option. UA does.
And this is about DL's restrictive SCOPE clause that only counts widebody flights towards the threshold of qualifying hours in the balance with their JV partners. Why else would DL limit themselves on fleet flexibility and the destinations they can serve?
I think it's a if this is half successful we'll bring an XLR when they eventually get them.
supposedly Quayle just said that some of these cities do not have enough premium demand to justify the XLR when it comes.
The MAX is a part of UA's TATL fleet and IT IS NOT anywhere comparable to the product on an XLR or a widebody, even marketing domestic first class as premium economy.
Using MAXs on TATL routes is all about low value mass volume traffic - the opposite of premium
marketing domestic first class as premium economy... is actually what premium economy is, minus the foot rest.
Where do you even come up with this nonsense?
The direct quote from Quayle makes no mention of premium Tim "Even if I had the A321XLR today, I would not fly the XLR to any of those routes that we're flying the MAX 8 on. I view the MAX 8 as one unique asset, and I view the XLR as another unique asset" - tell me where he says there's not enough premium - He also went on to say that the XLR will...
The direct quote from Quayle makes no mention of premium Tim "Even if I had the A321XLR today, I would not fly the XLR to any of those routes that we're flying the MAX 8 on. I view the MAX 8 as one unique asset, and I view the XLR as another unique asset" - tell me where he says there's not enough premium - He also went on to say that the XLR will replace the 757 (i.e. IAD-KEF).
You seem to have a problem with United offering a flight to Glasgow with not enough premium - so I decided to check what Delta's premium options are to Glasgow, so it doesn't fly there direct and has a single partner (KLM) that flies there. So I'd have to fly to Amsterdam and then backtrack making the trip about 10 hours there and 12.5 hours back (if the connection and Europe's worst airport is okay) vs flying direct on United. Please tell me why you think that is better than direct? Delta's offering is utterly terrible on this route - why would United try to compete on premium when it literally does not have to, that would be terrible business (which I know is good business in your eyes).
other people found the quote so it sure it isn't me. But let's face it: you can't admit any reality that is disconnected from what you want - EVEN IF UA EXECS say otherwise.
UA is cheapening its brand by offering all kinds of experiences, something neither AA or DL are doing.
the only thing worse is LH's Allegris airplanes that have business class seats blocked off.
As someone who lives in Martina Franca with LH Senator status and lots of family in the NY area, I'm so happy to hear about the Bari flight!
That Newark - Seoul route has to be a counterattack to Air Premia, who is already operating the route.
Most likely targeting the gap left by Asiana's merger with Korean. OZ will stop codesharing after the merger and the frequency will be limited. Also Air Premia will likely lose out. Their fleet is too small and their flights keep getting cancelled due to MX issues.
These are really good additions in my opinion. Everyone just expected them to copy Delta with Malta and Sardinia which they didn’t do. They even added flying to Korea and increased flying to Tel Aviv out of EWR. I’m wondering once the XLR come if they will be adding way more European flying or the plan is just to replace the 757.
So 1 widebody aircraft worth of expansion across the Atlantic and one new TPAC route.
and the MAX 8 - which is domestic configured - will now fly multiple routes across the Atlantic including to continental Europe.
UA's need to keep adding dots to their route map seems limited by their availability of new aircraft.
Not only are the XLRs not in the schedule - for now - for the summer of 2026 but...
So 1 widebody aircraft worth of expansion across the Atlantic and one new TPAC route.
and the MAX 8 - which is domestic configured - will now fly multiple routes across the Atlantic including to continental Europe.
UA's need to keep adding dots to their route map seems limited by their availability of new aircraft.
Not only are the XLRs not in the schedule - for now - for the summer of 2026 but UA seems set to start retiring widebodies given they say that they are supposed to receive about 20 new 787s in 2026.
UA is supposed to receive more new 787s by the end of this year based on their current guidance than they are adding in new widebody capacity in 2026.
I think it’s better than Delta not being able to make Geneva, Munich, and Brussels work right Timmy? Oh and this is one announcement the SFO announcements come later in the year and obviously will require widebodies.
@Tim Dunn
At this point, Delta is also retreating from some important markets like Brussels and Geneva. Brussels flights will be shifted to Atlanta from JFK while Geneva will be completely dropped from Delta's network. At the same time Delta will be launching flights to Porto which is much smaller than Brussels and Geneva. Why is Delta giving up in such important markets?
Delta is dropping precisely one city from its network - GVA. BRU will operate daily from ATL and MUC is double daily from ATL and DTW - but you knew all of that.
You desperately can't admit that UA's route announcement was weak and completely counter to the notion that UA is trying to be premium. Airlines focused on premium traffic don't make half of their new routes on narrowbodies that either have the worse...
Delta is dropping precisely one city from its network - GVA. BRU will operate daily from ATL and MUC is double daily from ATL and DTW - but you knew all of that.
You desperately can't admit that UA's route announcement was weak and completely counter to the notion that UA is trying to be premium. Airlines focused on premium traffic don't make half of their new routes on narrowbodies that either have the worse premium cabin among US carriers (UA's 757s) or none at all (the domestic configured MAX 8)
If you think that loss is offset by the need to fly narrowbodies without premium cabins on TATL flights, your bias is so thick you can't think straight.
You’re so delusional. If they are moving it then that means it wasn’t working. You will deny everything when Delta makes mistakes. You don’t need to worry about United being a premium airline since they have the most international flying and wide body aircraft. EWR and SFO both clearly have high premium demand you nutcase.
the only one that is delusional is someone that thinks that routes HAVE TO work from only one city or airport.
DL has the advantage of 3 strong East Coast hubs and TATL gateways - BOS, JFK and ATL. UA and AA would both love to have what DL has.
Just admit it... UA is so desperate to grow that it is flying domestic configured 737s across the Atlantic and from its NRT JV hub.
the only one that is delusional is someone that thinks that routes HAVE TO work from only one city or airport.
DL has the advantage of 3 strong East Coast hubs and TATL gateways - BOS, JFK and ATL. UA and AA would both love to have what DL has.
Just admit it... UA is so desperate to grow that it is flying domestic configured 737s across the Atlantic and from its NRT JV hub.
The only nutcase is someone that cannot admit that UA is more interested in adding dots to its route map than in providing any level of consistency in its product. The 757 was already the weakest US carrier J product but UA - unlike AA or DL - is clearly all-in on using the MAX to add dots to its route map.
Just admit it. UA is a high volume, medium quality airline that is more interested in flash than revenues. UA execs cannot argue in one breath about how great the premium market is and then send domestic aircraft on 7 and 8 hour flights w/ no J cabins.
and UA is clearly not growing as fast as the pace of widebodies coming in which says that 1. Kirby was telling the truth that UA's international growth would slow and 2. DL is adding TPAC capacity at a faster rate than UA and that will only accelerate as the 35Ks start coming online in 2027 and 3. UA is going to start retiring widebodies which I have said for years would have to happen while a chorus of people have argued about "growth, growth, growth"
UA's announcement was anemic. UA desperately wanted to grab a little attention from DL's earnings announcement which is propelling DAL stock up high single digits minutes before the market opens.
DL has the right plan to run its business; UA is focused on superficialities.
"The only one that is delusional is someone that thinks that routes HAVE TO work from only one city or airport"
No Tim, but if they can't make so many routes work from NYC, one of the largest O&D cities in the world, and they have to move them to hubs without competition, it speaks to DL's ability to compete against UA in such an important market.
Tim, you’re forgetting the main point:
Those cities are being dropped from NYC, while UA continues to add all those flights from EWR, solidifying its position as the number one northeast hub, the crown jewel of the region for UA.
Plus UA adding NYC-ICN before DL does? Wow.
Korean and Asiana combined already fly 4 daily flights JFK-ICN as part of the JV with Delta.
the most accurate thing you have written, Roberto.
actually, though, the JV at this point only involves KE flights. OZ is not part of the DL JV.
Once OZ is fully merged into KE, then their capacity will be added to the DL JV but I suspect KE is delaying doing that because DL wants to fly JFK and LAX to ICN on its own metal, replacing some of OZ's capacity.
DL does not...
the most accurate thing you have written, Roberto.
actually, though, the JV at this point only involves KE flights. OZ is not part of the DL JV.
Once OZ is fully merged into KE, then their capacity will be added to the DL JV but I suspect KE is delaying doing that because DL wants to fly JFK and LAX to ICN on its own metal, replacing some of OZ's capacity.
DL does not have the airplanes to add multiple new TPAC routes until the 35Ks start arriving.
We get it, Mark.
you are incapable of admitting that DL is more than capable of having a TATL network that is superior to UA's
DL has 3 gateways to Europe that combined have more capacity than UA from EWR and IAD.
DL has replaced the capacity from JFK to Europe with new flights ON WIDEBODIES. UA continues to grow by adding flgihts on domestic configured aircraft.
there is no way that UA can win any contest for premium traffic by having multiple flights/day on MAXs and dated 75s which have the weakest J product among US airlines across the Atlantic
I get you are on the spectrum and your dad flies for Delta, but kid it is an airline not a religion. This post is about United, which flies to more destinations than any other US airline, and is the largest int'l US airline. Not delta flying klan members from Alabama to ATL for meetings. Facts are stubborn things kid!
Jim,
and yet it is other people that cannot admit the facts including that there is nothing about a TATL flight on a MAX or that DL, not UA has the largest east coast TATL network.
It is actually other people that are so addicted to their religion of to "winning" that they are incapable of accepting actual facts
Tim, ATL is an east coast TATL hub? Sure, tell premium pax in NYC, WAS, and BOS that they'll need to connect in ATL to get to Europe. lol
UA, not DL, has the strongest TATL hubs in the northeast, covering NYC and WAS.
And why didn't you mention UA's powerhouse hub in ORD? What about IAH? What DEN? And it's no wonder you forgot to mention SFO, where they have 11 flights to 8...
Tim, ATL is an east coast TATL hub? Sure, tell premium pax in NYC, WAS, and BOS that they'll need to connect in ATL to get to Europe. lol
UA, not DL, has the strongest TATL hubs in the northeast, covering NYC and WAS.
And why didn't you mention UA's powerhouse hub in ORD? What about IAH? What DEN? And it's no wonder you forgot to mention SFO, where they have 11 flights to 8 destinations. London, Frankfurt, Munich, Barcelona, Rome, Amsterdam, Paris, Zurich, all have nonstop flights from SFO. No other airline even comes close to matching that level of European service from the west coast. Of course that's all in addition to their unparalleled TPAC service, with two separate banks to Asia.
UA is the largest airline to Europe, the largest airline across the Pacific, with the largest JV in both regions.
Their revenues and profits continue to increase, and they are now in the same league as DL. They have hundreds of more planes being delivered over the next few years.
DL is now reacting to Alaska, with their SEA adds, and drawing down NYC flights where they have to compete with UA. DL is best in areas where they don't compete. Those fortress hubs subsidize the areas where they face competition.
The 757s will soon be replaced by A321XLRs, complete with Polaris suites and Premium Economy
The 737 MAX 8s serve cities DL doesn't even serve at all. UA gives a choice of flying nonstop to a destination (where UA has shown they get a premium) or of taking a widebody to a larger city before making a connection. Apparently enough people want the nonstop to make it worthwhile.
Meanwhile DL has no appropriate aircraft to...
The 757s will soon be replaced by A321XLRs, complete with Polaris suites and Premium Economy
The 737 MAX 8s serve cities DL doesn't even serve at all. UA gives a choice of flying nonstop to a destination (where UA has shown they get a premium) or of taking a widebody to a larger city before making a connection. Apparently enough people want the nonstop to make it worthwhile.
Meanwhile DL has no appropriate aircraft to make these destinations work. When their 767s are all retired, they'll really be in a bind, with the A330 being their smallest plane to fly TATL.
DL will make you take a TATL flight from NYC, where you'll get approximately 3 hours of sleep, landing at approximately 2am, NYC time, before waiting a few hours for a narrowbody connection. DL give you no option. UA does.
And this is about DL's restrictive SCOPE clause that only counts widebody flights towards the threshold of qualifying hours in the balance with their JV partners. Why else would DL limit themselves on fleet flexibility and the destinations they can serve?
@Tim given this announcement doesn’t cover any of the changes in frequency to you know the other many destinations in Europe that UAL flies, how do you know that this is only one wide body of growth across the Atlantic? Or do you think that an airline can only grow with new destinations because your logic is flawed?
Also everyone knew they’d be testing out narrowbody destinations because they have the XLR coming in. Kirby...
@Tim given this announcement doesn’t cover any of the changes in frequency to you know the other many destinations in Europe that UAL flies, how do you know that this is only one wide body of growth across the Atlantic? Or do you think that an airline can only grow with new destinations because your logic is flawed?
Also everyone knew they’d be testing out narrowbody destinations because they have the XLR coming in. Kirby even said he wants 10-12 new routes in Europe on the XLR. This is clearly trying to test out some possibilities of those.
That said I do hope they use the 787s they get to replace 767s… DL doesn’t even have the 767 replacement on order
I and everyone else can go just by what UA announces compared to what other carriers announce.
and I am sure that UA is trying to add new destinations but if they stoop to a domestic configured aircraft in order to provide the platform for a route that will not switch to the XLR until 2027 or beyond, it speaks volumes about UA's "need" to keep adding dots to their route map at the expense...
I and everyone else can go just by what UA announces compared to what other carriers announce.
and I am sure that UA is trying to add new destinations but if they stoop to a domestic configured aircraft in order to provide the platform for a route that will not switch to the XLR until 2027 or beyond, it speaks volumes about UA's "need" to keep adding dots to their route map at the expense of revenue quality and premium seats.
DL just said that TATL premium revenue is strong; UA loves to talk about how it is chasing DL in premium revenue generation. It makes no sense for UA to be adding a bunch of TATL flights on domestic configured aircraft if it really believes what it says about premium revenue
UA is fixated on mass volume over being premium or most profitable
DL, OTOH, is growing its TPAC network at a faster rate than UA and domestic w/ more absolute capacity; this notion is that UA is going to be out in front is just an internet dream that is not matched in reality
Again spectrum boy, ask your dad when he flies how it works. UA= largest international U.S. airlines.
Delta, flying klan members and your dad around the south.
Different markets kid.
Or it just says that they think these routes are more focused at more price sensitive customers (i.e. tourism more than business)? I feel like you're drawing huge conclusions from what seems like relatively low risk routes - they test them out and see what sticks.
"DL just said that TATL premium revenue is strong" - you mean where they literally reported a fall in revenue YoY today? The Ed Bastian interview this morning...
Or it just says that they think these routes are more focused at more price sensitive customers (i.e. tourism more than business)? I feel like you're drawing huge conclusions from what seems like relatively low risk routes - they test them out and see what sticks.
"DL just said that TATL premium revenue is strong" - you mean where they literally reported a fall in revenue YoY today? The Ed Bastian interview this morning basically said their growth in premium is Domestic. He did say he expects an improvement in TATL in 4Q but made no mention of premium TATL - just TATL overall. So not sure what your source is, just seems like a classic TD unfounded statement.
Not sure if it was VFTW or here but you made the statement that Delta was going to serve more pax out of NYC than UA this year because of the EWR issues. Just thought I'd give you an update on that bet: YTD to August Delta is about 350k ahead (in August United closed the gap by about 80k). In 2024, UAL beat Delta by 520k across the remaining 4 months so are you still backing your bet?
It’s a little underwhelming vs last year but they already have a good international network and I know they have plane issues. I do wonder if AA will ever try and get somewhat competitive internationally as they are well behind Delta and United there as we all know. I’m not sure the AA leadership could point out some of these places on a map.
it is absolutely underwhelming.
AA and DL both added more capacity and did so with aircraft that have full premium cabins.
It’s amazing your hate for UA…. Delta is the best. We get it…..
Right?? I can’t even imagine having this clown as a passenger on an other airline. All he’ll be doing is criticizing … such a pill. lol.
AA will not grow unless they change their leadership completely.
@Dn10
At this point, Delta is also retreating from some important markets like Brussels and Geneva. Brussels flights will be shifted to Atlanta from JFK while Geneva will be completely dropped from Delta's network. At the same time Delta will be launching flights to Porto which is much smaller than Brussels and Geneva.
AA is adding about as much net TATL capacity (5 daily widebody routes) as DL (2.5 net new daily widebody routes) and UA (3.5 net new daily routes but only 1 is on a widebody) combined in Spring / Summer 2026.
Albeit this is to somewhat catch up albeit this is when TATL performance appears to be slightly waning (peak DL's 3Q #'s where total revenue dropped to Europe and yields were down mid to...
AA is adding about as much net TATL capacity (5 daily widebody routes) as DL (2.5 net new daily widebody routes) and UA (3.5 net new daily routes but only 1 is on a widebody) combined in Spring / Summer 2026.
Albeit this is to somewhat catch up albeit this is when TATL performance appears to be slightly waning (peak DL's 3Q #'s where total revenue dropped to Europe and yields were down mid to high single digits vs PY), but I think given AA's smaller TATL footprint at its East Coast hubs vs UA and DL many of the additions are low-hanging fruit that should do fine (e.g., MIA-MXP, DFW-ATH).
Not to mention there are the rumored A321XLR additions that are not yet announced for AA that are rumored to also start next summer which may see another handful of routes (e.g., jonNYC is saying it's a matter of time for an AA JFK-EDI announcement).
Jeremy
thank you for your logical post.
UA is 3rd among the big US 3 in TATL widebody growth for 2026 with just one widebody's worth of additional capacity.
The rest is on narrowbodies and a significant portion is on the MAX which has no premium cabins.
DL did say that 3rd quarter TATL yields are weak. The fears of reduced travel from Europe probably had some influence. but there is likely overcapacity...
Jeremy
thank you for your logical post.
UA is 3rd among the big US 3 in TATL widebody growth for 2026 with just one widebody's worth of additional capacity.
The rest is on narrowbodies and a significant portion is on the MAX which has no premium cabins.
DL did say that 3rd quarter TATL yields are weak. The fears of reduced travel from Europe probably had some influence. but there is likely overcapacity since all of the big 3 continue to add capacity to Southern Europe.
There is a reason why UA is not adding much capacity - because the market doesn't support it.
DL is adding moderately and still shifting from northern to southern Europe. AA is adding across Europe to catch up and they will likely beat UA in deploying the XLR across the Atlantic.
the bigger theme is that UA is not going to grow near as fast as it did post-covid and also will certainly start widebody retirements. Even though UA execs have said this would happen, there are a host of people on aviation social media that have told us for years how fast UA would keep growing.
Today's announcement is proof that the social media warriors were wrong - to no surprise -and UA execs have told the truth.
It is simply much harder to find places to grow on UA's network; DL is growing faster across the Pacific - where UA has seen strong growth while AA is going to fill in its route system w/ XLRs while UA will use those aircraft heavily as replacements for 757s and perhaps some MAX 8s.
Sorry Tim, you do know they can increase capacity on existing routes and that would still be a capacity increase right? Like you’re looking at one side of capacity increase and being like “this side was lower than the other airlines so therefore UAL sucks” and not considering that they can also just increase capacity to existing destinations… your take is flawed.
UA is the largest U.S. airlines internationally. Period dot kid. I know the spectrum makes it hard to fathom for your dad's airline, but DL just did not do it kid.
and, so what, Jim.
UA is not expected to come close to DL's level of profits for 2025.
DL execs just said that DL would generate 60% Of the US industry's profits, UA most of the rest and a few others a little bit.
And yet UA flies more total capacity than any other airline - for what reason?
UA is not the NYC subway. It is a for-profit company.
If there is...
and, so what, Jim.
UA is not expected to come close to DL's level of profits for 2025.
DL execs just said that DL would generate 60% Of the US industry's profits, UA most of the rest and a few others a little bit.
And yet UA flies more total capacity than any other airline - for what reason?
UA is not the NYC subway. It is a for-profit company.
If there is a disconnect between capacity and profits, then UA is on the wrong track. It's not hard for anyone who is even mildly objective to see
Does your dad own stock in delta klan airlines? Otherwise revenue and profit are irrelevant. Joe Q public wants to fly overseas right now (at least wealthy Joe Q Public).
Your trailer park klan folks in the deep South for Delta cannot find them on a map. Also UA makes more on flying than DL and isbthe largest airline internationally. Facts are stubborn things boy!
Yes Tim, thats what having a great loyalty and credit card business looks like - it helps them make a lot of the profit. Other airlines have to fly to make their money.
I don't think anyone here denies that Delta has an amazing credit card business (and the best in the industry) - by targetting premium customers the brand has got great credit card spenders - it is a good strategy. Now you...
Yes Tim, thats what having a great loyalty and credit card business looks like - it helps them make a lot of the profit. Other airlines have to fly to make their money.
I don't think anyone here denies that Delta has an amazing credit card business (and the best in the industry) - by targetting premium customers the brand has got great credit card spenders - it is a good strategy. Now you just have other airlines trying to compete, and they continue to close the gap - I've told you before. No one denies the fact that Delta is more profitable than the other airlines - but you keep trying to shout down other airlines because they employ strategies to compete? That's literally their job. United has chosen a strategy of flying to more places as a way to attract customers from Delta (and AA, SW and others of course) that went more premium or low cost- it seems to be working, that doesn't mean Delta is going to fail, it just means that United is executing that strategy. You say things like "they are desperate for growth" - well yeah their strategy is growth. Its like saying Delta raising credit card fees or flying to more "expensive" destinations is because they are desperate for premium spenders - well duh their strategy is to go after premium spenders. You seem to praise one airline for executing the strategy that they set out and then attack other airlines for executing their own strategies even though both strategies appear to be working?
Tim, DL just announced that their TPAC unit revenues dropped again, second quarter in a row.
DL flies to 4 cities in Asia. Four. None of those are from NYC.
UA flies to almost 20. So please stop trying to make it sound like DL has any sort of TPAC advantage, especially after they slashed their TPAC presence and closed so many stations.
And remember math:
Airline A grows from 1 flight to 2....
Tim, DL just announced that their TPAC unit revenues dropped again, second quarter in a row.
DL flies to 4 cities in Asia. Four. None of those are from NYC.
UA flies to almost 20. So please stop trying to make it sound like DL has any sort of TPAC advantage, especially after they slashed their TPAC presence and closed so many stations.
And remember math:
Airline A grows from 1 flight to 2. 100% growth rate.
Airline B grows from 10 to 15. 50% growth rate.
Which airline grew more?
I hope American Airlines doesn't become overly "competitive"—because while competition is supposed to drive down prices, that’s often not the case in the airline industry.
I must fly AA exclusively domestically for work trips. Earlier this year, I was able to upgrade to domestic First on several LAX trips for under $320, which feels like a fair value for the product. However, my final LAX trip of the year—coming up in a few weeks—now has...
I hope American Airlines doesn't become overly "competitive"—because while competition is supposed to drive down prices, that’s often not the case in the airline industry.
I must fly AA exclusively domestically for work trips. Earlier this year, I was able to upgrade to domestic First on several LAX trips for under $320, which feels like a fair value for the product. However, my final LAX trip of the year—coming up in a few weeks—now has upgrades priced at over $800 per segment.
If this is the direction AA is heading under increased “competitiveness,” I’m not on board. What’s working well right now is their international pricing, especially on partner metal, which I’d really like to see preserved.