Air New Zealand is abandoning its Fifth Freedom route between Los Angeles and London. Will United step up with a second daily flight?
Air New Zealand has served London since 1982. Until a few years ago, Air New Zealand ran a round-the-world service, flying from Auckland to Los Angeles to London to Hong Kong to Auckland on NZ1/2. First, Air New Zealand suspended its Hong Kong to London service, citing competitive pressures. Now it is using similar language to explain its total departure from London.
Today Kiwis have more than twice the number of ways to fly to London than a decade ago and preferences have changed. Less than seven percent of all airline travelers between Auckland and London chose to fly via Los Angeles last year.
At the same time, the Atlantic has become one of the most hotly contested routes in the world and Air New Zealand lacks the home market advantages and scale of the North American and European airlines we’re up against.
With the suspension of this route, Air New Zealand will terminate the positions of 130 cabin staff who exclusively serve the LA to London route. That’s a lot of staff for one Fifth Freedom flight. Air New Zealand will make efforts to offer these crewmembers different positions in the airline, including a potential relocation to Auckland.
An Opportunity For United
United and Air New Zealand are not only Star Alliance partners, but joint venture partners. With Air New Zealand’s suspension of LAX-LHR, might United add a second daily from flight between LAX and LHR.
You might recall that in 2016 United announced it would double up on LAX-LHR. The new flight was loaded into the schedule and many tickets were sold. But in early 2017, United abandoned the new flight, citing weak demand.
With Air New Zealand gone, United may have additional incentive to consider that second daily service. UA923 currently departs at 5:30PM. A midday or late evening departure would complement the existing service nicely.
United’s decision to add a second flight to Heathrow is not continent upon gaining Air New Zealand’s slot. I would not be surprised if Air New Zealand sold or leased it to United, but even if it sold the slot to the highest bidder, United could shift one of its flights from Newark. That too would be a commercial decision, well beyond my pay grade. The point is simply that United could add this flight no matter what Air New Zealand does with its slot.
Horrible International Connection At LAX
Any discussion on this topic is not complete without first identifying an issue that likely made Air New Zealand’s Los Angeles to London service a far less attractive option.
All passengers transiting through the USA must clear passport control and customs, even if they are just connecting. With horrible lines, gruff agents, and a generally arduous process, who would want to fly to London via Los Angeles when you could do so via Singapore, Bangkok, Doha, Abu Dhabi, or Dubai? Each of those airports make the transit experience far more enjoyable than the mess that is LAX.
Even when all the refurbishment at LAX are complete, transiting will still require exactly what it entails now. You cannot blame passengers for seeking to avoid this.
CONCLUSION
United has a great opportunity to double up service between Los Angeles and London. Even if just seasonal, offer a second flight would show commitment to its LAX hub and provide greater flexibility for passengers.
image: Prayitno / Flickr
Your comment of 130 cabin crew being too many is very interesting and that number is about correct.
I don’t know how many F/As NZ flies on their 77W, but I am going to assume around 8. This means they need 16 F/A per day for a round trip. Now let’s assume that each F/A flies about 1.5 RTs per week (one RT on this route is 3 days, Dept Monday, overnight, leave Tuesday, arrive Wednesday). That means about 80 F/As would be needed at a minimum, now consider vacations, need for reserves, and F/As that fly less than 1.5 RT per week, you easily get another 50.
I think it would be quite nice, even though I typically use FRA or MUC as my gateway into Europe on United (connecting through another United hub first). I have always lamented UA’s near lack of direct service from LAX to Europe. Even one extra flight would be great!
“who would want to fly to London via Los Angeles when you could do so via Singapore, Bangkok, Doha, Abu Dhabi, or Dubai?”
That there’s less concern transiting through countries that are essentially authoritarian states rather than the land of the free is a pretty damning statement about America in 2019.
Yep. But more simply it is that the USA is not set up to handle international – international transit.
Exactly. I have made that mistake and will never so so again.
The US is about the only country left that has not been able to provide reasonable transit facilities. The process is totally backwards and a first world country unworthy. And thats even before considering the rude, trigger happy and low IQ staff.
The good thing is that there is generally plenty of choice so one can connect in Asia, Europe to have a civilized experience.
Canada also doesn’t allow sterile transfers (with some exceptions).
Hahahahaha ‘land of the free’??? Damning statement??
Wake up man an open your eyes. Look at what your biggest export product is and talk again.
Planes, helicopters and spacecraft?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_exports_of_the_United_States
Great point with regards to screening, that’s a 9/11 loss.
i doubt it. UA is not expanding in LAX (nor does it have the gate space to). I dont imagine there were many fifth freedom passengers booking LAX-LHR on NZ that wern’t connecting from elsewhere. That route is already super saturated.
The reality for UA is that i’s LAX-LHR service is not successful in comparison to those of BA, AA or Virgin (I don’t know about Norwegian). By contrast, its SFO-LHR service is often completely full and is very difficult, if not impossible, to upgrade. Were they to acquire the spare slot pair, I would imagine that they’d add a third SFO-LHR flight. After all BA has three to the Bay Area (and uses larger planes to SFO than UA, and Virgin has increased to two.
I agree with the lax point. Most Australians and kiwis hate lax. Security can be rude, the non tom Bradley terminals for connections are third world etc. lines are massive for non Americans and they’ll put 2 officers onto them. My family and friends will pay a big premium for connections through Dallas or even San Fran. Rightly or wrongly.
While NZ operated AKL-HKG-LHR the service was very popular and offered a strong alternative to the LAX transfer. I used the HKG route a number of times but I would never use the LAX route.
NZ are right though, there are many alternative ways to AKL and almost all of them are better than the offering of NZ with the outdated seats and less than stellar IFE. I don’t think in London we will miss them.
When Air NZ discontinued LHR-HKG route a few years ago, the slots pair was taken over by Cathay Pacific. CX and NZ entered co-shared agreement, even though they are on different alliances. I guess NZ this time will simply sold the slots to highest bidder.
My hunch, and I could be wrong, is that NZ will hold onto the slot just in case and least it out to someone. I think AKL-LHR is truly an impossibility for the foreseeable future, but will be possible one day. I guess the question then is whether anyone would want to take a 22-hour flight…
So sad. I can see why there’s apprehension for the AKL-LAX-LHR trip but I would have liked to fly LAX-LHR on NZ.
You still have my trip report!
I often flew LAX-LHR on ANZ (one more time this December). Their J service is just so friendly and the fares are usually much lower than UAL’s. I am always promoting this route to friends who had no idea it was available. Sad to see it go.
If I was transiting internationally, I would absolutely avoid LAX (and if we are making a list to avoid, put Mexico City on that list as well…) Now if only there was a way for those of us who live in LA to avoid arriving into LAX! 45mins in customs last night for a US Citizen w/o Global Entry.
I agree. I fly LAX-LHR monthly and for the past few years NZ has been my choice over UA (despite my 1K status). The NZ service and pricing is so much better than UA’s IMHO. I also really appreciate NZ’s timing. Their LHR-LAX flight was usually the last of the day, allowing me almost a full day of work in London (vs. having to be at LHR in the AM for UA).
Its sad that LaMigra also made LAX an unbearable choice for Kiwis having to endure a fuel stop in the post 9/11 world.
While UA and NZ have antitrust immunity and are in a joint venture, the scope of their agreement does not include the UK.