DCF
Aug 21, 04, 7:16 am
I am one Air NZ very frequent flyer who is appalled by what has been allowed to happen to services to Honolulu and other Pacific destinations .
I understand that big jets no longer need to refuel on transpacific flights and that cabotage rules forbid domestic LAX-HNL traffic. I also understand that between 2000 and 2003 the exchange rate discouraged Aussies and Kiwis from holidaying in Hawaii.
What Air New Zealand's current management don't seem to understand is their niche in the longhaul market. Air NZ has never been particularly competitive in the NZ, Australian or European markets on price, but has always had the advantage of allowing business or tourist flyers the opportunity to break their journey in the Pacific.
For over a decade eight of my family members in Australia, New Zealand, the UK and Austria have flown Air NZ longhaul several times each year. And the two favoured stopovers are always Tahiti and Honolulu, primarily because Rarotonga has iffy accommodation and cooler weather and Fiji is a racist pseudodictatorship which has effectively practised ethnic cleansing for the last 15 years, so we wouldn't want to spend our money there.
Now, however, Air NZ is blindly following the low-cost short-haul model which even Ryanair is despairing of (and look what happened to BA and KLMs similar mistaken enterprises). And this plays very, very badly to longhaul passengers who find themselves stuck on Express (if only) flights.
Consequently, in the unlikely event that a European traveller can get from LAX to Rarotonga, Apia or Nadi as part of his or her longhaul itinerary, he will then get treated as part of a shorthaul cattle herd for the most distant part of his journey.
Meanwhile Tahiti is scuppered as a practicable stopover by the reduction in flights to and from LAX.
The Hawaii situation is even worse. Even if you buy your ticket from Air NZ and fly every other segment between say Sydney and London on Air NZ, you will only earn Airpoints Dollars at the lower Star Alliance rate because Air NZ can't be bothered to fly LAX-HNL any more, but punishes its own customers who it books onto United for that sector.
I fear that if Air NZ does not wake up soon it will have no longhaul market left. It already charges more than double what Hawaiian Air does to fly from Australia to LA or Honolulu both in Economy and Business Class. And Air Tahiti Nui is soon to link Australia with LA, New York and Europe via Tahiti and is already promising better prices, better service and easier stopovers.
Putting Virgin's fancy beds in Premium Class is a short-term fix that will not win market share for Air NZ in the longhaul market. Seats have roughly a 7 year life, and within a short period the competition will always have a new product available.
It's ironic really. The very things which attracted me to Air New Zealand in the first place now look like diverting me to Air Tahiti Nui and Hawaiian Air.
I understand that big jets no longer need to refuel on transpacific flights and that cabotage rules forbid domestic LAX-HNL traffic. I also understand that between 2000 and 2003 the exchange rate discouraged Aussies and Kiwis from holidaying in Hawaii.
What Air New Zealand's current management don't seem to understand is their niche in the longhaul market. Air NZ has never been particularly competitive in the NZ, Australian or European markets on price, but has always had the advantage of allowing business or tourist flyers the opportunity to break their journey in the Pacific.
For over a decade eight of my family members in Australia, New Zealand, the UK and Austria have flown Air NZ longhaul several times each year. And the two favoured stopovers are always Tahiti and Honolulu, primarily because Rarotonga has iffy accommodation and cooler weather and Fiji is a racist pseudodictatorship which has effectively practised ethnic cleansing for the last 15 years, so we wouldn't want to spend our money there.
Now, however, Air NZ is blindly following the low-cost short-haul model which even Ryanair is despairing of (and look what happened to BA and KLMs similar mistaken enterprises). And this plays very, very badly to longhaul passengers who find themselves stuck on Express (if only) flights.
Consequently, in the unlikely event that a European traveller can get from LAX to Rarotonga, Apia or Nadi as part of his or her longhaul itinerary, he will then get treated as part of a shorthaul cattle herd for the most distant part of his journey.
Meanwhile Tahiti is scuppered as a practicable stopover by the reduction in flights to and from LAX.
The Hawaii situation is even worse. Even if you buy your ticket from Air NZ and fly every other segment between say Sydney and London on Air NZ, you will only earn Airpoints Dollars at the lower Star Alliance rate because Air NZ can't be bothered to fly LAX-HNL any more, but punishes its own customers who it books onto United for that sector.
I fear that if Air NZ does not wake up soon it will have no longhaul market left. It already charges more than double what Hawaiian Air does to fly from Australia to LA or Honolulu both in Economy and Business Class. And Air Tahiti Nui is soon to link Australia with LA, New York and Europe via Tahiti and is already promising better prices, better service and easier stopovers.
Putting Virgin's fancy beds in Premium Class is a short-term fix that will not win market share for Air NZ in the longhaul market. Seats have roughly a 7 year life, and within a short period the competition will always have a new product available.
It's ironic really. The very things which attracted me to Air New Zealand in the first place now look like diverting me to Air Tahiti Nui and Hawaiian Air.