[MarkivJ]

https://www.routesonline.com/news/38/airlineroute/293193/british-airways-resumes-additional-qatar-airways-australianz-codeshare-routes-from-august-2020/

For now, they’re saying resumption of flights to SYD is moved to mid 2021 but something tells me BA may not fly their metal to Australia anytime soon.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Bullfrog

[SimonS1]

I wouldn’t be surprised. Other carriers now have these routes
under control…..Air NZ is gone from London, BA in partnership with QR and Qantas in a j/v with Emirates.

The market will be very different for BA, they had invested big in the North American routes.

[Olneyflyer]

I agree Simon$1. Crew and aircraft utilization were never great on that sector. I could only imagine that profits were thin in the Singapore – Sydney sector. It would be much more profitable if they put the aircraft and crew on a North Atlantic run were business and First revenues are much larger and less reliant on the visiting friends and relations market.

[AMcWhirter]

Olneyflyer – I presume you refer to point-to-point traffic taking SIN-SYD-SIN ? In other words travellers buying tickets in S$ and AU$.

I would think LON-SIN is also profitable judging by the fares BA charges and especially in premium classes.

LON-SYD is the issue judging by poor aircraft utilisation and the price gap between LON-SIN and LON-SYD (in normal times).

[Inquisitive]

It is a question of product quality and price point.

In the London to Sydney or Melbourne route, so many better product alternatives are available from SQ, CX, Qantas, QR and EK, BA just cannot compete with these. Unless new technology allows direct nonstop flight, BA cannot make money.

USA destinations make a lot of money as BA mainly competes with main 3 US airlines, their product quality was similar to BA, hence BA is preferred purely from service angle. No one in their right mind would like to travel US airlines business class if alternative is available. But now things are changing. AA seats are markedly better than BA and service have improved. So USA market may see more competition if US airlines continue to improve.

[SimonS1]

[quote quote=1006892]But now things are changing. AA seats are markedly better than BA and service have improved.[/quote]

BA gets a cut of AA sales under the JBA.

[Bullfrog]

In the 70s, BA flew their aircraft to Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney & Brisbane. With the advent of Emirates, Qatar and Etihad, there is no wonder that it’s just Sydney now.

Nothing lasts forever.

[AMcWhirter]

At that time BA also served Auckland and Christchurch in New Zealand.

However the decline started many years before the Gulfies.

The decline in direct fights to Oz (remember at one time KLM, Lufthansa, Alitalia, Olympic and Jat) also flew direct from Europe) started when the likes of SIA, Cathay Pacific, Thai and MAS increased their flights to Europe from around the early 1972s (CX first came to Europe in 1980).

They were then able to sell Europe-Australasia (via their SE Asian hubs).

The Gulfies followed later and now (pre-Covid of course) we have many more Asian carriers including those from mainland China.

2 users thanked author for this post.

EU_Flyer, Bullfrog

[MarkivJ]

I believe there’s a lot of potential to re-deploy the aircraft for NA routes (in addition to exploring new global destinations too). When things get back to pre-COVID levels and BA doesn’t have enough large capacity aeroplanes for NA, they’ll need all the extra metal, especially to non oneworld cities. Take the Silicon Valley / Bay Area for example. Pre-covid NS20 schedules read a total of daily two 747s and one A380 (between SFO and SJC). Whenever we start seeing that traffic again, the only way to make up for the capacity will be increasing frequency.

Likewise, so many towns like San Diego, Austin, etc. were, even in pre-COVID times due for a capacity and frequency increase.

[SimonS1]

It will be interesting to see. Firstly can BA retain their slots? If the 80/20 rule is reintroduced that gold be very expensive. Second there will be plenty of spare aircraft for the foreseeable future. Thirdly pre-covid levels could be some way off (I believe IAG are planning on end 2021).

A lot could happen by then. But I agree Australia is unlikely to be top priority.

1 user thanked author for this post.

anyonebutba

[Justin Germany]

I am sure BA can make the route more profitable in the future, once overall demand recovers – this was, and will be, a very busy route. The existing LHR-SIN-SYD route has absolutely the best flying times available, namely a late evening departure from London, allowing for a relaxed dinner and plenty of time for a long sleep prior to landing at Singapore. It then lands in Sydney very early before the rush. On my last trip it was the first aircraft to land at Sydney and I was out of the airport – with baggage – within 20 minutes of landing. (The return timings are also good.)

The other key benefit is that is the same aircraft that flies the whole distance. The refuelling stop in Singapore is optimal – short enough to keep the overall journey time to a minimum, long enough to get a shower (or a quick swim in the outdoor pool!). It also means that you cannot miss your flight connection and nor can your baggage. Even if that happens relatively rarely, it adds a very long delay to an already long journey, given that most carriers have only one or two services per day to Sydney from their hubs.

BA’s biggest issue prior to COVID-19 was its competition, most of which had upped their game in terms of their service offerings, particularly in business class, with aisle access for all seats on a lot of carriers. As soon as BA deploys its new club world suite on this route, its product will be amongst the best again and will surely attract higher average fares (and profitability) than at present, despite the slight reduction in overall seating capacity resulting from the larger club world seats.

The argument that they could redeploy the same aircraft on UK-USA routes does not hold up. They can buy additional aircraft to do this irrespective of the UK-SYD route (which they were already doing prior to COVID-19). The ultimate decision to keep the service depends on its profitability and that depends on BA’s management to ensure that its service offering is at least on a par with competitors. It already has the additional advantage in terms of frequent flier benefits for UK passengers – you get a whapping amount of avios and tier points. I fly from Germany via London and collect enough points for 1) almost silver membership, just from this flight and 2) enough avios for 4 Europe-UK return flights, when flying club world. This benefit, once added to the flying time and “same aircract” advantages above, with the new club world suites, should make it the best option of all carriers.

So I hope BA continues the route, both for personal reasons and also because it’s a flagship BA route and could/should be a very profitable one.

7 users thanked author for this post.

AFlyingDutchman, Frederic, wingcommander, Bullfrog, ASK1945, DerekVH, PhilipHart

[anyonebutba]

Technically it should be a flagship route, however it has not been so for at least 15 years. flagship/profitable routes for BA are JFK, JNB, SIN, HKG,LOS, Sydney or any Australian route has not been profitable for many years, hence why they scrapped MEL, PER and BNE long ago. fares in Club/First are much much lower on other one stop routings, the BA 15/16 is often full LHR -SIn and then lightly loaded in F/J onwards, same with BA 9/10 when that too went to Sydney via BKK, hence why the BKK – Syd was also dropped. to compensate they have mixed fleet crew onboard with lower operating costs, yet they still make little money, so its highly expected that this will be dropped to save precious cash, especially now they have LHR – SYD codeshares with one stop and similar flight times with QR, MH, and CX, why would they waste money…makes sense to pull OZ altogether, this is the inside info I have from people inside BA revenue management. so BA metal wont be returning anytime soon, if indeed at all.

3 users thanked author for this post.

GivingupBA, Bullfrog, ASK1945

[AMcWhirter]

This is an interesting discussion.

What all of us have forgotten is that Virgin Atlantic used to operate direct flights from London to Sydney via Hong Kong.

But London-Sydney was unprofitable and the the Sydney service was dropped in 2014.

Virgin Atlantic found the London-Hong Kong-London sectors more profitable rather as BA must find London-Singapore-London.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Bullfrog, anyonebutba

[anyonebutba]

[postquote quote=1007152][/postquote]

I agree wholeheartedly, this is what my friends at BA say also, hence why it returning will be very surprising, yields LHR- SYD are far less than LHR SIN , so will be interesting to see what happens 🙂

[lostantipod]

I have been plying the LHR-SYD route in J every year for 19 years. Originally I used QF or BA via Asia, also done TG, MH, CX …then I switched to Etihad and Qatar , who in addition to the latest jets with the best J seats in the sky, offered a jetlag-busting early evening arrival into SYD.

In parallel, BA made Avios redemptions to SYD near impossible (hard to avoid as there became fewer flights to just one city) The service was reduced from 747’s to noisy clapped-out 777-200’s. The CW seat became uncompetitive. They couldn’t compete on price. I don’t know if they ever switched to 787s or not, but every time I checked airfares, BA were amongst the most expensive yet not the highest quality experience. And going forward, a point overlooked in the thread so far….. if BA starts SYD again, you’ll be served by cabin crew that are currently at the centre of an employment relations disaster. Good luck with that.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Bullfrog, fqtvgla, Tomasz

[Author]

Posts