Jan 4, 2017, 2:31 am
Last edit by: brunos
Guaranteed F destinations:
North America:
JFK
YVR
SFO
LAX
ORD
BOS
Europe:
LHR
CDG
FRA
MXP
ZRH
Asia:
HND
Africa:
None
Semi-reliable destinations:
BKK
TPE
PEK
MNL
SIN (Haven't seen this available in years * NetJets Germany * 20 May 2019) Flew F in Feb, but no F seems scheduled in future, Brunos 21/5/19
North America:
JFK
YVR
SFO
LAX
ORD
BOS
Europe:
LHR
CDG
FRA
MXP
ZRH
Asia:
HND
Africa:
None
Semi-reliable destinations:
BKK
TPE
PEK
MNL
CX Routes with First Class?
Nov 10, 2016, 1:18 am
#63
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ORD [formerly] + HKG
Programs: CX Diamond, AA exExPlat, BAEC exGold, HH Diamond, Hyatt Globalist, Starriott Titanium, GE
Posts: 2,966
I thought the next outport going to 359 was ZRH, but I can't find the source anywhere so I must have been mistaken. Anyway, ZRH is one of the worst performing routes across the network now, for a while.
Always full load...hard until instant
Always full load...hard until instant
Dec 17, 2016, 11:33 am
#65
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Zurich
Programs: BA GGL, TK*G EL, KL P ELPL, ex AB P, ex LH/LX Sen, HHonors D4L, Bonvoy P
Posts: 1,647
My understanding of the ZRH situation is that it is doing very well in J and PY, average in F and really poorly in Y.
Now, this is a challenge with the 77H, but even worse with the 359 which has 214 seats in Y, as compared to 182 on the 77H. So the 359 is no solution for the ZRH demand mix.
This mix is typical for ZRH, other airlines such as SQ experience the same, so airlines usually deploy J heavy aircraft to ZRH, if they have any.
Now, this is a challenge with the 77H, but even worse with the 359 which has 214 seats in Y, as compared to 182 on the 77H. So the 359 is no solution for the ZRH demand mix.
This mix is typical for ZRH, other airlines such as SQ experience the same, so airlines usually deploy J heavy aircraft to ZRH, if they have any.
Jan 3, 2017, 9:29 am
#67
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 7,708
If you want to know what planes CX flies where (and, by extension, what products are available where), we maintain a page that has all that information. This is also linked in the top thread on our forum. Fyi "77H" is the only plane in the CX fleet with First Class.
Cathay Pacific Fleet, Route and Configuration Guide
Jan 4, 2017, 12:57 am
#68
Join Date: Jun 2009
Programs: A3 Gold, AA Platinum, Marriott & Discovery Platinum, IGH Diamond
Posts: 889
No.
If you want to know what planes CX flies where (and, by extension, what products are available where), we maintain a page that has all that information. This is also linked in the top thread on our forum. Fyi "77H" is the only plane in the CX fleet with First Class.
Cathay Pacific Fleet, Route and Configuration Guide
If you want to know what planes CX flies where (and, by extension, what products are available where), we maintain a page that has all that information. This is also linked in the top thread on our forum. Fyi "77H" is the only plane in the CX fleet with First Class.
Cathay Pacific Fleet, Route and Configuration Guide
Regards,
El Puerco Volante
Jan 4, 2017, 3:28 am
#70
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ORD [formerly] + HKG
Programs: CX Diamond, AA exExPlat, BAEC exGold, HH Diamond, Hyatt Globalist, Starriott Titanium, GE
Posts: 2,966
Jan 4, 2017, 6:22 am
#73
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: SYD | HGH
Programs: CX DM, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton DM, Marriott Plat
Posts: 2,121
CX111/110 and CX161/162 are still served by A330s and change them to flights with F cabin will only increase the J, PEY and Y seats all together. CX had a 77H shortage before but now with a few of them replaced by A359s on certain route....
Jan 4, 2017, 6:23 pm
#74
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Programs: CX, UA, Shangri-La, Hyatt, Starwood
Posts: 7,708
First part of opportunity cost: yield. Have you seen what EK and SQ sell F tix for ex-Australia? In F-class land, they are extremely cheap, especially if you're comparing to cash tix to/from North America. Not in the same ballpark. Australia seems to have about as cheap F class as you can get anywhere in the world, which is saying something considering Australia is a developed country. Great for customers, but not great for an airline like CX. It doesn't serve CX well to take a plane off JFK, LAX, LHR, etc. and divert it to Sydney where they would be lucky to make 1/3 of the money for that F seat. What would you fly to JFK then. 77G? This is, of course, the tradeoff if you want to run one or two daily F-equipped planes to Australia. You'd have to swap one of the existing JFK/LAX/LHR/SFO etc. 77H frequencies for 77G, so SYD can get 77H. That would be crazy!
Second part of opportunity cost (unique to Australia): max # of flights under the bilateral agreement, as mentioned above. There is a healthy amount of Y class demand ex-Australia and the limited slots mean CX must maximize their seats/plane. This is why CX has upped the # of seats by sending 77G and 35G, starting to replace the 33Ks. 77H (the first-class equipped plane) is very premium heavy, which means less total seats. So if you insist on F, you inevitably cut the seats available in Y and PEY for CX. 77G has 268 Y seats and 32 PEY. 77H has 182/34. You get the picture. For a market like Australia, sending 77H is a bad strategy unless you can crush your yields on J and F. And "crushing" J and F yields ex-Australia - especially if you dump more premium capacity in - just ain't happening given what a competitive market Australia already is and low population country.
Last edited by QRC3288; Jan 4, 2017 at 6:29 pm
Jan 4, 2017, 11:26 pm
#75
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: SYD | HGH
Programs: CX DM, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton DM, Marriott Plat
Posts: 2,121
The reason F isn't sold to Australia is straightforward - F yields are too low and the opportunity cost is too high.
First part of opportunity cost: yield. Have you seen what EK and SQ sell F tix for ex-Australia? In F-class land, they are extremely cheap, especially if you're comparing to cash tix to/from North America. Not in the same ballpark. Australia seems to have about as cheap F class as you can get anywhere in the world, which is saying something considering Australia is a developed country. Great for customers, but not great for an airline like CX. It doesn't serve CX well to take a plane off JFK, LAX, LHR, etc. and divert it to Sydney where they would be lucky to make 1/3 of the money for that F seat. What would you fly to JFK then. 77G? This is, of course, the tradeoff if you want to run one or two daily F-equipped planes to Australia. You'd have to swap one of the existing JFK/LAX/LHR/SFO etc. 77H frequencies for 77G, so SYD can get 77H. That would be crazy!
Second part of opportunity cost (unique to Australia): max # of flights under the bilateral agreement, as mentioned above. There is a healthy amount of Y class demand ex-Australia and the limited slots mean CX must maximize their seats/plane. This is why CX has upped the # of seats by sending 77G and 35G, starting to replace the 33Ks. 77H (the first-class equipped plane) is very premium heavy, which means less total seats. So if you insist on F, you inevitably cut the seats available in Y and PEY for CX. 77G has 268 Y seats and 32 PEY. 77H has 182/34. You get the picture. For a market like Australia, sending 77H is a bad strategy unless you can crush your yields on J and F. And "crushing" J and F yields ex-Australia - especially if you dump more premium capacity in - just ain't happening given what a competitive market Australia already is and low population country.
First part of opportunity cost: yield. Have you seen what EK and SQ sell F tix for ex-Australia? In F-class land, they are extremely cheap, especially if you're comparing to cash tix to/from North America. Not in the same ballpark. Australia seems to have about as cheap F class as you can get anywhere in the world, which is saying something considering Australia is a developed country. Great for customers, but not great for an airline like CX. It doesn't serve CX well to take a plane off JFK, LAX, LHR, etc. and divert it to Sydney where they would be lucky to make 1/3 of the money for that F seat. What would you fly to JFK then. 77G? This is, of course, the tradeoff if you want to run one or two daily F-equipped planes to Australia. You'd have to swap one of the existing JFK/LAX/LHR/SFO etc. 77H frequencies for 77G, so SYD can get 77H. That would be crazy!
Second part of opportunity cost (unique to Australia): max # of flights under the bilateral agreement, as mentioned above. There is a healthy amount of Y class demand ex-Australia and the limited slots mean CX must maximize their seats/plane. This is why CX has upped the # of seats by sending 77G and 35G, starting to replace the 33Ks. 77H (the first-class equipped plane) is very premium heavy, which means less total seats. So if you insist on F, you inevitably cut the seats available in Y and PEY for CX. 77G has 268 Y seats and 32 PEY. 77H has 182/34. You get the picture. For a market like Australia, sending 77H is a bad strategy unless you can crush your yields on J and F. And "crushing" J and F yields ex-Australia - especially if you dump more premium capacity in - just ain't happening given what a competitive market Australia already is and low population country.
Very very good point but I don't felt ex-Australia F are that cheap, at least QF never discounted their F product and rarely discount their J product.
I totally agree with not pulling off those 77Hs from premium heavy routes, but what about those 77Hs on the routes been replaced by a359? Just one is perfectly enough for SYD to have daily F service and carry more cargo and PEY & J seats than A333. And, CX can sell SYD-LHR in F then.