Re: MD-17 vs. MD-11F/DC-10F

Date:         19 Feb 97 02:46:23 
From:         Chuanga@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang)
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
References:   1 2 3 4
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <330cecc6.7929634@news.concentric.net>,
Jean-Francois Mezei  <"[nospam]jfmezei"@videotron.ca> wrote:
>If UA wants to capture the Japan<->Asia market, why then doesn't UA
>create a Japanese subsidiary who would then operate under Japanese rules
>and agreements ?

Because most countries do not allow their own airlines to be controlled
by foreigners.

>
>I can understand that US airlines such as US would love to be able to
>capture Japan<->Asia traffic perhaps more than they want the US<->Asia
>traffic. (higher yields etc).
>
>Lets look as Asia as a "continent", and the USA/Canada as a continent.
>If Japan allows UA to carry Japanese from Japan to Indonesia for
>instance, will the USA allow ANA or JAL to compete in the LAX-JFK route?

That's domestic route, or cabotage traffic.  Almost all countries do not
allow foreign airlines to carry domestic traffic. Many foreign airlines
have argued that the US should allow such traffic in return for their
fifth-freedom traffic.  However, I don't think it will happen any time
soon.  Some international airlines do have some fifth-freedom rights
from the US.  Just to name some airlines: Varig, VASP, JAL, Malaysia,
Singapore, China Airlines, EVA, Korean, Cathay, Philippine, Air-India,
Biman, Gulf Air, etc.


>It is one thing to allow a foreign airline to hub at your airport to
>help transfer its own passengers to onwards flights, but it is another
>to allow a foreign airline to play in your own playing field.
>

For foreign airlines to tap the US domestic market, the most efficient
way is through investing in US carriers.  It will not be a simple task to
establish an efficient subsidiary operation in the US even if the US
allows foreign airlines do to so.  The US carriers are in general very
efficient.