Qantas: New Spirit Announcement
Back to Forum- This topic has 26 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 19 Aug 2011
at 09:12 by travelswithmybriefcase.
-
- Author
- Posts
- Skip to last reply Create Topic
-
continentalclubParticipantAir New Zealand will actually have up to three flights a day into and out of Heathrow come the W11 timetable LondonCity; however I wouldn’t read very much in terms of profitability into that. NZ currently has a surplus of aircraft and a fairly restricted selection of destinations relevant to its home hub – an NZ 747 recently sat at LAS for four days on a self-charter doing nothing at all.
All the signals are that Sydney is something of a vanity destination for both Virgin and British Airways, but one that BA in particular would find politically quite difficult to remove altogether – irrespective of the JSA requirements.
Sydney is therefore probably fairly safe for the moment; MEL doesn’t reportedly have anything like the traffic for British Airways to be interested (it was usually only a tag-flight from SYD in the past anyway), and is already well-served by too many other longhaul carriers for there to be an obvious opportunity. If anything, BNE is the city showing greater potential.
London is probably less marginal for Qantas, as exLON yields to Far East points at least have the potential to be higher than for those between Australia and the Far East. That has to be weighed against the increased costs associated with remote ops – and that seems to be part of what QF is doing in this review.
For BA, there are clearly other destinations that must be on the radar for new routes. Tags are from the timetables of the 80s; what passengers want today is direct service (why else has 787 generated so many orders?) – and there are obvious cities which currently see only codeshare links which could be ripe for direct connection. Asiana have recently announced that they’re going up to daily service from LHR to ICN with a 10h50m flight time. The BA/CX route via HKG takes almost six hours longer.
I’m not sure that MNL has anything like the premium traffic that BA would need, and SGN isn’t yet rammed at the front on existing services.
Fort Lauderdale and Salt Lake City are obvious US BA network omissions, and Santiago may have legs too – linking up with the new QF service perhaps, as well as LAN operations there.
If I recall correctly, at least some of those QF destinations from 1973, btw, were intermediate stops on the way to other European destinations – necessary in part due to fuel and range limitations at the time.
16 Aug 2011
at 15:10
VintageKrugParticipantYes it will be interesting to see what BA does with the additional slots and the three aircraft it will removed from serving the BKK-SYD route.
Some exciting new destinations, let’s hope!
16 Aug 2011
at 17:36
DanwolfParticipantGood news on the increased frequency of the LHR – HKG flights. I initially thought they were going to cut capacity (sightly) when they replace BA27/28 with a B777. Perhaps this route is what they will use the slots for?
Also, this squares them up closely with CXs 4 flights a day
16 Aug 2011
at 18:33
Binman62ParticipantI think we should be cautious as the impact of these changes will be higher fares and, going on current trends, poorer customer service. One just has to experience the lack of any joined up cooperation at LHR T3 between QF and BA. It is close to non existent.
The two carriers very different products and different baggage and excess policies
Unless there is a sea change in thinking and cooperation,then this is likely to be bad news for customers.
The reduction of capacity will also badly impact on Redemption availability.
16 Aug 2011
at 18:55
BucksnetParticipantLondonCity – BA and Qantas have the JSA and share all costs and revenues on the route, so there is no need for either of them to fly all the way. Air NZ does not have this arrangement, so has to serve LHR with its own metal.
BA and Qantas could save large sums of money by just meeting in the middle, but prestige seems more important. Also, BA could move BKK and SIN to T5 for easier connections.
16 Aug 2011
at 19:58
LPPSKrisflyerParticipantThis is interesting news however I’m not sure it will make very much difference to the market share of BA and QF routing between the UK and Aus. They are already more expensive than anyone else except SIA at times but neither offers a really premium product compared to the Gulf carriers who are taking the market share.
I wonder how MH and CX will react if at all. I can’t see MH raising their fares to BA/QF levels so they will still undercut. CX is usually fairly competative too but of course don’t offer F to SYD.
We live in interesting time for those of us who fly this route regularly.
17 Aug 2011
at 07:12
ScandinavianParticipantRegarding QF’s European product it’s a pity that they have yet to fully leverage their limited cooperation with Finnair. Finnair offers a substantial Asia network with at least a daily service to QF’s SIN, HKG, BKK and NRT gateways. The combined QF/AY product is far superior in terms of schedule (flight times etc.) to the current QF/BA product with regard to a wide range of European continental destinations. Finnair’s on-board product has improved and Helsinki is a wonderful airport to connect at. Surely, deepened cooperation with AY would complement the current BA JSA and strengthen Oneworld’s position on the Europe to Australia sector.
Naturally BA, QF, AY and CX fully cooperating would be even better. But neither BA nor QF seem to be able to work as closely with CX as they are with AA or even JL.
Maybe AY is finally becoming a more interesting part of Oneworld given its comprehensive Asia network…
17 Aug 2011
at 17:53
cbroo79Participant@Scandinavian: Great points. AY really has greatly improved and the transit at HEL is easy, fast and convenient. AY also offers very competitive pricing. Use them quite a bit on ZRH-HEL-Asia routes savings are about 20% with only minor differnces in total travel time. QF does not seem to see them as a partner, but sticks to BA with its absolutely abissimal service and outdated and worn equipment.
18 Aug 2011
at 00:27
austlineParticipantAgree AY is okay and transiting HEL is a pleasure, but remember QF/BA have a JSA on the Aust/UK route which pools all revenue and expenses and frankly is the only way that both carriers can make the route financially viable against the competition from SEA and ME carriers.
QF’s priority is to stem the losses and try and make a return on the UK/Europe route hence its decision to focus on the UK with BA via SIN a daily service SIN/FRA.
Also it is worth noting that part of QF’s plan is to also strength its ties with MH and offer a seamless service to FCO/IST/AMS. Interesting to see if and when QF will fly to KUL.
I must admit I would prefer to go through to the UK on QF -especially a380, these days as I find BA service is very hit and miss and their food and wine offerings need a lot of work.
18 Aug 2011
at 01:22
AndyInSwedenParticipantRegarding QF and AY…
BA/QF have the JSA and share costs/revenues (if I understand the JSA correctly) . That means there is no incentive for QF to only sell one long-haul sector Australia-BKK/SIN/HKG/NRT for pax to continue with AY to Europe. QF is way better off when using BA or their own services from SIN(BKK) to Europe and gett a bigger share of the revenue.
I’m quite sure, but could be wrong, that QF(BKK/SIN) and CX (HKG) have entered codeshare agreements with AY for flights from BKK/SIN/HKG to and from Australia. This means that there is cooperation within oneworld on the Australia market.
18 Aug 2011
at 07:56
ScandinavianParticipantQF codeshares on SIN/BKK to HEL whereas AY has a wider codeshare on QF between Asia and Australia. Hence QF does not have any great incentive to promote QF/AY services since Australia-HEL is a limited market.
Understand totally why pushing traffic on to BA/QF JSA routes is priority number one for QF. My point was rather that QF with AY offers a more competitive product to certain northern European cities than the current BA/QF product. This should be used more actively by QF to strengthen their European product offering and market share thereby complementing BA JSA services. QF would naturally generate more revenue on its Australia-Asia services as well as sales commission etc for the AY sectors.
18 Aug 2011
at 08:15
travelswithmybriefcaseParticipantAs someone who divides their time between Aus and the UK I have been following this thread with interest.
I think the key is the what kind of aircraft QF puts onto the Asia (BKK/ HKG) – OZ legs.
If they are flat bed equipped 747s (ie with Skybed Mk 2 a la A 380) I don’t see too much of an issue – regardless of whether you prefer BA’s Club World seat or the QF Skybed Mk 2 they are both flat beds.
Where I would see a BIG issue would be if QF tried to do these sectors with A330s, with “slopey” Mk 1 Skybeds.
This is what QF does on the OZ – LAX – JFK routing with the LAX – JFK leg operated with ‘slopey” seating (whether with the current A 330 or the previous Mk1 Skybed equipped 747 on that sector)
This just won’t wash and would represent a major deterioration vs, for example, a BA fully flat bed from BKK – SYD as is currently the case.
Hopefully BA has had the sense to insist that a Mk 2 Skybed 747 is used for the BKK / HKG – OZ sectors otherwise there will be a mass exodus carriers who can offer a flat bed for the whole journey
Don’t know if QF will have enough MK 2 Skybed equipped 747’s to make this happen in 2012 though which could present its own set of challenges.
Not so worried about the lack of F between BKK / HKGand Oz – frequently do LHR – HKG on BA and connect to Oz on CX which of course does not offer F on those sectors.
BUT it does offer a fully flat bed in Business which is the minimum standard as far as I am concerned – the lack of such a product is the reason that I have never taken QF 29 /30.
19 Aug 2011
at 09:12 -
AuthorPosts