Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Sean-SAN- wrote:The DL flights were consistently full, it's just a matter of profitability. Good luck to HA!
sprxUSA wrote:I love "intent to serve" articles and whatnot. Such a definitive term lol.
Hope they do better than it would appear the market needs. Third time a charm? HA x 2, DL x 1
FSDan wrote:Sean-SAN- wrote:The DL flights were consistently full, it's just a matter of profitability. Good luck to HA!
The difference between DL and HA here is that DL likely had dozens of other potential markets they could re-allocate the 763 to, so HNL-FUK didn't even necessarily have to be losing money for them to cut it. HA is basically limited to Pacific Rim markets and Hawai'i-mainland flights, so the opportunity cost of flying HNL-FUK should be lower.
MIflyer12 wrote:The operating cost should be a bit lower, too, with HA wages vs. DL wages and profit-sharing. I'd worry about the extra 50 seats on an HA A330 and their effect on avg fares, though.
FSDan wrote:MIflyer12 wrote:The operating cost should be a bit lower, too, with HA wages vs. DL wages and profit-sharing. I'd worry about the extra 50 seats on an HA A330 and their effect on avg fares, though.
It says they're looking at a 4x weekly service, so the difference in seats between HA's service and DL's daily (or at least near daily) service shouldn't be too drastic. Given that it's a leisure market, 4x weekly should do fine. HNL-CTS is probably a somewhat similar market, and has hung around (3x weekly) even after being upgauged to the 332.