[AMcWhirter]

As expected, the boss of Air AsiaX has backtracked on that tweet issued last November.

Aviation Week reports today that if Air AsiaX were to return to Europe it wouldn’t happen for at least another three years, according to its CEO.

Already some so-called “sweet spot” routes are being axed. Adelaide is going and the latest news is that Kuala Lumpur-Nagoya is set to close next month.

http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/airasia-x-will-wait-returning-europe

[MrMichael]

I think at the moment he is more concerned about whether to send Harry Redknapp on a long haul flight!

[K1ngston]

+1 MrMichael that made me smile 🙂

[LuganoPirate]

I read some research recently that showed people were more concerned about price than comfort and very few would pay extra just to have an extra inch of legroom and nine across seating rather than ten.

[JohnnyFox]

I’m not sure MartinJ’s observation about one-ways holds true any longer. I’ve recently bought one ways London to or from KL in economy (for the servants, naturally) which were under £300.

[jjlasne]

Good question. Another airline trying its hand at it is Norwegian. Did not notice big loads last year on those Boeing 787’s and they were troublesome. Finally Iceland Express is coming back as Wow Air, a new People Express or Laker Airways. These airlines come and go but legacy carriers carry on, doing the same thing they have been doing since the 1920’s; carrying cargo and passengers.

[conc001]

However where I think this could work is in there business class, they sell these seats for much lower price than BA,MA etc and there must be a market for people who want to fly well , without paying £5,000+ for a return.

I wish them the best of luck.

[AMcWhirter]

conc001 –

Hello. To which airline are you referring ? I assume with “MA” you are referring to Malaysian Airlines (MH) so the low-cost carrier in question would be Air Asia X.

But as I posted above, Air AsiaX has now decided not to fly to Europe, at least for the next few years.

Quoted in Aviation Week, the CEO is now saying, “We’re not obliged or fixated on a return to London.” [The European routes will be relaunched “only if it makes sense relative to the other growth opportunities we have.”

http://aviationweek.com/commercial-aviation/airasia-x-will-wait-returning-europe

[conc001]

sorry meant MH, also still throught they where looking to re enter the market , my mistake

[AMcWhirter]

Management reshuffle at Air Asia X as the CEO resigns.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/30/airasia-x-financing-idUSL4N0V95IZ20150130

I wonder if the loss-making carrier will ever return to Europe ?

[rferguson]

Hi Alex….they are certainly talking about it once again! Fernandes has been tweeting again….

http://www.ausbt.com.au/airasia-x-eyes-australia-new-zealand-flights?utm_source=internal&utm_medium=flipper&utm_campaign=home-flipper

[AMcWhirter]

Hello rferguson

Thanks for sharing. The point is that right now is that not only is the competition fiercer than it was before but more importantly AirAsiaX has no suitable aircraft to fly KL-London non-stop.

The London route would be flown by an A350 in a tight 10-across layout (Airbus recommends airlines install 9-across seating) but the delivery date for this aircraft is some years away.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/10/14/airasiax-europe-idUKL3N0S948720141014

Mr Azran Osman Rani, the previous CEO, has left the company so it would seem that is the reason airline management is reconsidering Europe.

But in the past, the “sweet spot” according to AirAsiaX is around eight hours flying time so that is why it concentrated on flying to Australia (New Zealand was axed along with Europe a few years ago) and NE Asia.

I don’t have the financial figures for China or Japan (but the airline has just axed Nagoya after just over one year on the route) however, in the case of Australia, AirAsiaX lost a hefty A$42 million in the three months to September 2014, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/aviation/embattled-airasia-x-cuts-flights-to-australia-20141120-11qbek.html

Of course, AirAsiaX may well return to Europe but the question must be asked “Does low-cost work long-haul ?”

[rferguson]

Hi Alex,

Totally agree with you – a successful long haul loco would need the 787 or A350 to really work these days.

There was a really interesting article in Time magazine this week about low cost long haul actually. It was profiling three ‘low cost’ long haul airlines – WOW, la Compagnie and Norwegian. In short, the article concluded that although the three had different models, cost effective aircraft was the real key to a successful long haul loco. Which kinda contradicts itself as it went on to describe how la Compagnie’s fleet is ‘old tech’ 757’s.

In terms of WOW, their management say their strength is in using narrow body A320’s over the atlantic – cheaper to operate, less crew, fewer seats to fill – and operating ‘one stop’ services via Iceland to europe as it figures many flying to/from the continent to stop somewhere with the legacy carriers anyway. Seems to make sense.

It then went on to describe the approach of la compagnie, which if i’m honest sounds a little less convincing of success. The airline claims it will succeed by exploiting the massive difference in economy and business class fares with the legacy carriers (it uses an example of a return paris – NYC fare being $1K with AF in Y and $5K in J) and target the in between ‘sweet spot’ as it describes it. Those that are willing to pay a premium over economy but not five times the price.

With Norwegian their approach to success is the ability to fly the 787 long haul which has the lowest costing seat per km in the sky. They also take advantage of open skies agreements for example setting up a ‘mini’ long haul hub at LGW as well as employing their crews where employee costs are cheapest.

One thing is common with all three of these airlines is that their low cost long haul ambitions are nearly entirely based on transatlantic flying. As you mention, flying east they would probably find a much harder time with the gulf carriers.

[AMcWhirter]

Well Air AsiaX today declared a huge loss of M$519.30 million which is several times greater than last year.

It may now defer deliveries of new aircraft, cut underperforming routes and reorganise staff.

The carier’s recent expansion has been on roughly 6 to 8 hour sectors both within Asia and to Australia.

Its former CEO claimed that flights of around 8 hour were the “sweet spot” for a long-haul, low-cost carrier. KL-Europe was deemed to be too far.

So we’ll have to see whether London is still being considered.

But as I mentioned above, the carrier has no suitable planes at present to operate KL-London non-stop. And the delivery of its A350s (assuming Air AsiaX takes delivery on schedule) is some years away.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/25/us-airasia-x-ceo-interview-idUSKBN0LT0B920150225

[knightflyer]

K1ngston – Interesting that you had such a poor experience on D7.

I have flown maybe 50 sectors in the past 4 years with them out of KL, to/from PEK, HGH, PVG, ICN, MEL and TSN before they switched to PEK. All of these were in premium (now officially called business) and apart from the unavoidable delays in Chinese airports their premium product was an absolute winner at a fraction of other business class options. No issues with service, nice pillow and quilt and able to sleep on angled lie-flat (compared to upright offerings in BC on same sectors from the likes of Korean and Malaysian.) Many of these runs to places like Qingdao with inbound to HGH, outbound from PEK to allow full working days and more time at home. No major issues, lost bags or missed connections I could blame on them. Maybe you can tell but I’m a loyal follower 🙂

[Author]

Posts