coolfish1103

Article 1: http://www.cdnews.com.tw/cdnews_site...ocid=100517063

Basically, it's a complaint made to the Control Yuan of Taiwan by various oversea Taiwanese group to residing in France on EVA Airways canceling the three weekly passenger routes between TPE-CDG yet still keeps the cargo routes since November 23, 2007. The complaint was made to since last year to the Centre de ressources éducatives de Taiwan in France but received no response.

The groups believed that the actions of EVA axing the route has caused Political, Cultural, and Economic disconnections between Taiwan and France since this is the only direct route. Most of the Taiwanese residing in France along with students studying there expressed that they are disappointed.

They also believe that EVA has not handled this situation correctly, and said they canceled this route mainly due to no profits. However, it should be noted as a management problem since it's always 80% full. Furthermore, EVA still kept the cargo route and would not return the route rights back to the government. It's very hard for Taiwan to receive route rights and it should not be manipulated by an airline. CAA of Taiwan has the responsibilities for this incident to occur.

International air traffic rights should be the citizens' asset, not EVA's asset. Therefore, the Taiwanese residents living overseas in France requested EVA to start the route again. If not done so, they should return the route rights to the government, and let other airlines handle this route.

Article 2: http://udn.com/NEWS/NATIONAL/NAT5/4520699.shtml
Article 3: http://udn.com/NEWS/NATIONAL/NAT5/4520518.shtml

It has become a disaster to travel to Taiwan from France. Flights use to arrive at 7 am in the morning and we would be home at 10am, but now, we have to transit through Amsterdam, and we would arrive at 6pm the next day.

With the direct routes being canceled, it's impossible to send foreign travelers over to Taiwan. It also has a great impact on the tourism in France as there are less passengers arriving from Taiwan. When Édith Cresson visited Taiwan this year to see the elections, she had to transit as well. When she saw the Personnel from Centre de ressources éducatives de Taiwan, she asked... It takes such a hassle to travel to Taiwan now??

Lots of people said... if EVA Air does not want to fly, ask other airlines to fly. Taiwanese residents in France think the process is very simple, since EVA does not want to go with the flying contract, just let other airlines fly. Why can't China Airlines fly? They believe the Ministry of Transportation should either demand EVA Air to fly TPE-CDG again, or make China Airlines take over this route.

Lee, head of the CAA stated that the bilateral between Taiwan and France states that only one airline may be appointed on each side to fly the route. Cargo and passenger route for TPE-CDG are combined, and EVA Air still has the cargo route, so it's impossible to appoint another airline to takeover the passenger route.

EVA Air stated that they have not made any profits when flying this route for the past 10+ years. Due to the rise of fuel prices, they had to convert all the passenger routes to cargo routes. EVA Air responded that they will reinstate this route if the fuel prices will continue to decrease. As of now, there isn't a timetable for the flights to resume.

What did China Airlines respond to the request of the oversea residents by managing this unprofitable route? Ang, China Airlines' France Sales Manager said: If the government appoints China Airlines to fly, China Airlines will fly.
--
Does anyone actually fly TPE-CDG that's actively on this forum?

I wonder what will happen?

1. EVA reinstate TPE-CDG, up to three weekly (I think this is most likely going to happen).
2. EVA forced to give up cargo routes, letting China Airlines take over.
3. A new bilateral to be negotiated by CAA with France.

jimyvr

On one hand they're bashing EVA's below-the-par service before they ceased operation and now on the other they're like crying babies because EVA dropped it?

Airlines exist to make money as a business, not a charity group

Why didn't they ask Air France to operate it instead then? Even AF realized they couldn't even make any money after serving TPE for 2 years when the oil price was probably like $20 or $30 per barrel in the 90s.

And what makes people think China Airlines is willing to fly under this environment?

jimbo99

Yep, all very childish!

But an EVA purser told me a few weeks ago that she thought they'd reinstate Paris.

kaichun1216

I do agree airlines exist to make money as business. However, I personally think EVA just don't work harder to run this route (even some other destinations).

In fact, most people think EVA just get lucky having Paris back to 1993. This route originally should be assigned to CI.

coolfish1103

If the new air routes around Shanghai would work, it would save some fuel for flying to Frankfurt and Paris, CDG, in which it will make both routes a lot better than before. I think China Airlines will want to fly TPE-CDG if this route works, but I don't think EVA Air will let that happen.

I wonder why Frankfurt works for CI (even a 744) and Paris, CDG does not for BR? Simply because of the market? I don't think BR worked hard enough for their long haul routes... since Auckland is gone as well (and there are no competition).

jimyvr

EVA was supposed to fly to Italy but ended up lost the rights to China Airlines.

And how hard do you want EVA to work on?

Plus even 100% full load doesn't guarantee you a full profit these days.

kaichun1216

I remember it's becuase Mongolia doesn't allow CI and BR to cross over. That's why their westbound non-stop flights to Europe need to fly over Russia.

Business relationship between Taiwan and Germany is tight. CI's Frankfurt for sure has more business travelers than BR's Paris. When CI switched to non-stop flight in late-2001, this route is even more popular. It causes both C and Y class fare are always high.

jimyvr

You've pretty much summed up why EVA failed in CDG. And would CI flying be any better? Would CI guarantee to keep the passenger route even if it has the rights at this environment?

I don't recall Mongolia has anything to do with it. The northbound Siberian route goes over Russian Far East then turns left across Siberia.

kaichun1216

I remember EVA comments, "although we help government sign the bilateral, it's OK for CI operating flight to Rome." Most people thinks that's becuase EVA already got Paris and had no stance say something about Italy flight.

Mongolia thing didn't make known to public.

There is one thing: CI had experienced really tough time to launch new destination before 1990. CI may be lame in making some decisions, but they, for sure, do a good job to run new destinations, like AMS, FRA, DEL.

Of cource CI's Frankfurt has more business travelers. However, CI also try to arrange passengers transferring to other Europe city through FRA. The codeshare plan with DB/CSA is successful, too. I think it combines different factors that CI can run FRA better, and most people would agree CI really makes effort to operate this route. Btw, some EVA Paris passengers also jump to CI's FRA for fast connection after Paris flights suspending.

coolfish1103

I don't think Paris CDG would be that bad to China Airlines considering they were also looking for Brussels and Prague before even though Paris won't have connecting traffics to absorb due to the nature of not having fifth freedom. It seems like they are doing well on some of the inferior destinations such as Guam and Palau.

The route China Airlines taken over from Far Eastern Transport, TPE-ROR, will become a scheduled destination from 01DEC08 according to Taiwanese tourism group. Charter flights will continue till the end of November and 7 additional flights will be added in October. It will be in operations 4 days a week, on Tues, Thursday, Saturday, and Sunday on 737-800.

On the other hand, TPE-GUM has been upgraded to A330-300, keeping 2 weekly services between the two cities. I wonder how's the load on this route? In addition, some news for CI on an A330-300: http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/...0News/1885379/ Seems like they are keeping this A330-300 for a while?

milehighclubnz

A good way for CI and BR to cater to those mostly leisure markets is the tagging (not entirely 5th freedom, more like BR's YVR-EWR or CI's ANC-JFK).

BR/CI can tag CDG to their existing European service (subject to regulatory approval), and CI doesn't need to operate specific nonstop TPE-KOR, I think TPE-GUM-KOR will be quite sufficient.

What do you guys think?

ionlyflyupfront

EVA is in business to make money, HTF can anyone with half a brain say they should fly a route at a loss to keep people happy , my god some of the comments I have just read are beyond belief

username

It will be interesting...if CI joins SkyTeam and BR joins *A, then maybe they need to swtich the routes.

Years ago, it was a huge disappointment that CI did not get CDG - I remember the news "CI Bought all the Airbuses but Did Not Get the Route".

I am not sure if tagging the CDG flight to another point without the additional traffic/traffic rights will make it more financially feasible for BR. I thought they used to do CDG via BKK or DXB but switched it to nonstop when the flight path over China opened? Seems like the key is cargo but still not good for 74Es.

By the way, I can't find any mention that BR will do TPE-YVR-EWR. This, by the way, has been suggested for years but the problem is Canada required visa for Taiwan ROC passport holders transitting to the US through Canada.

coolfish1103

I think he is talking about TPE-SEA-EWR, as that's comparable to TPE-ANC-JFK. Tagging TPE-GUM-ROR is pointless as there are enough customers from both regions, although not operated daily. There aren't that many carriers operating ROR or GUM.

If you can't on/offload passengers in the intermediate stop, it's quite pointless (just like how CI first axed IAH, then also axed SEA).

I think it's the right thing to do to operate TPE-YVR-XXX as it will grab some passengers on both sides. If visa is an issue, you can always provide some direct flights like how TPE-NRT-HNL and TPE-HNL is working. For example...

TPE-ANC-JFK/EWR 257
TPE-YVR-JFK/EWR 146

...but I don't think that's going to happen any time soon.

jimyvr

First. CI dropped SEA. CI probably "didn't work hard enough" to keep itself on this route.

Second. KOR is Kokoro is Papua New Guinea