Qantas Frequent Flyer - Australia's Qantas: Welcomes Air Deal With Singapore

Australia's Qantas: Welcomes Air Deal With Singapore

http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/030923/0200000056_2.html

with a follow up story today Qantas, Singapore leave LA route up in the air (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/09/23/1064082998085.html)

(Edited to fix UBB)

[This message has been edited by QF WP (edited 09-23-2003).]

It doesnt make sense - why should Singapore grant Qantas full 5th freedom rights and not expect the same. Is BKK such a great transit point they cant apply that pressure.

BKK's advantage as a transit point for the Kangaroo route is that it's cheap, cheap, cheap. That's why QF and BA were leaning towards BKK over SIN as the hub for some years, although the pendulum has swung back a bit.

I think that if SQ were to be granted fifth freedom on Oz-US, it would be a huge gain for SQ with nothing comparable in return for QF, because SQ would be using those rights in conjunction with those in the Singapore-US bilateral.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by jongar:
It doesnt make sense - why should Singapore grant Qantas full 5th freedom rights and not expect the same. Is BKK such a great transit point they cant apply that pressure. </font>

As I have pointed out in another forum, QF need to stop *somewhere* between Australia and Europe. There are various places which are logical places to do so, SIN, BKK, KUL, HKG amongst them.

Passengers prefer SIN, and SIN has made great efforts to attract carriers to SIN rather than the other ports, since transitting passengers spend money, often stay over (thereby resulting in money injected into the local economy), etc. In short, it is in SIN's interest that QF stops at SIN on the way to Europe. QF then picks up in SIN for onward carriage. (No argument so far, I hope).

Now, looking at the situation of SQ flying from Australia to the United States, how on earth does SQ need to fly via Australia to get from SIN to LAX (or SFO, or wherever)? It is NOT a natural part of their route network (like SIN-LHR is for BA and QF), and you can rest assured that even if they were to carry on the flight numbers - say SQ 222 SIN-SYD-LAX, there would be almost ZERO passengers flying SIN-LAX on this flight (unlike through passengers on the QF flights over SIN).

In short, this is nothing more than opportunism on SQ's part, and I think that QF have every right to protest.

Dave

Does Singapore Airlines get the right now to fly between domestic points in Australia without ongoing carriage of the passengers ?
The arrival of another full service carrier between BNE ,SYD and MEL would be a great boon for me and my organisation.
Ozflier

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by ozflier:
Does Singapore Airlines get the right now to fly between domestic points in Australia without ongoing carriage of the passengers ?
The arrival of another full service carrier between BNE ,SYD and MEL would be a great boon for me and my organisation.
Ozflier</font>
But Singapore does not allow any international carriers to operate domestic services in Singapore http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif.

Not even helicoper service? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
But Singapore does not allow any international carriers to operate domestic services in Singapore http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif.</font>



[This message has been edited by Wongo (edited 09-25-2003).]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Wongo:
Not even helicoper service? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif</font>
or bus services! (don't mention the war ...)

When I think of how QF welcomes competition,I can well remember the "whingeing and wailing" from Geoff Dixon about the danger to the viability of the Aussie icon by allowing non trans Pacific United pax to use its one return flight per day between SYD and MEL.Transport Minister Anderson caved in then as he has done on this last occasion.I would dread to see what would happen if Dixon ever got his hands on NZ.
Ozflier
Ozflier

thadocta's arguements are well placed with respect to SQ flying SYD-LAX/SFO.

What about BA though?

SQ have been asking for the rights to fly LHR-JFK for at least five years, and have the rights to fly to the US under the US-SG bilaterals.

SIN-LHR-JFK is a perfectly reasonable flight route.

BA are allowed hubbing rights ex-SIN; yet UK government policy is actively "protecting" British Carriers (In this case BD) which can't fly LHR-US but would "like to" http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif

Regards,
Alex