Go Back   FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Qantas | Frequent Flyer
Sign in using an external account

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 27, 12, 1:05 am   #46
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Downunder
Programs: oneworld sapphire, Star silver, SPG Gold, Sixt Platinum, IC Platinum RA
Posts: 378
On talk of management the most short sighted decision is to still send their first 787's to JQ. I mean if Singapore, Cathay and Emirates offer significantly more flights, overall, to key business markets (especially not ex-SYD) that's a real problem. Furthermore when $80k a year Qantas flyers are mulling to fly UA SYD-SFO and there's obviously solutions to their network not being considered.
johnyip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 27, 12, 3:59 am   #47
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 22,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by correctioncx View Post
Based on what?
Two examples from the Centre for Aviation:-
Quote:
oneworld's BA and Qantas may shake up global alliances irreversibly as Emirates and Qatar enter (6 June 2012)

...

oneworld is also the weakest of the global alliances in the Asia Pacific region, a situation aggravated by dominant carrier Cathay Pacific taking an ambivalent stand and working with few members, partially a result of it competing with British Airways to its key market of London and greater Europe, with Japan Airlines on a host of routes and Qantas to Australia (where competition laws prevent partnering).

Looming is Cathay's cross-equity with Star's Air China and musings from Beijing that Air China and Cathay should grow closer, which could see Cathay leave oneworld for Star. Such a scenario could pave the way for the addition of Hainan Airlines Group, which includes Hainan in the mainland and Hong Kong Airlines in the namesake special administrative region.

...
Quote:
British Airways/IAG with bmi looks to re-establish world leadership and long term survival (10 January 2012)

...

The big yawning hole, or at least one of them, is in China. To be absent from the Middle Kingdom, redolent with opportunity, is not acceptable. Aside from the recovering, but downsized post-bankruptcy JAL (complete with its Air France allegiance), representing the oneworld team is an ambivalent Cathay Pacific and aggressive Finnair, which is now turning to secondary Chinese cities. But they do not offer the same opportunity as a mainland carrier.

...
There are also plenty of examples of CX refusing to help BA and QF during disruptions, precisely because of the bad blood between them. Or, look at who handles these airlines at HKG - and look at the history of the handling companies.

It's very easy for a passenger to look only at the passenger experience and extrapolate from that what the companies are actually thinking and doing. But that can give a very misleading impression (like the myth that stellar cabin service and fawning cabin crew = good airline = safe airline). Just because CX is happy to provide OW pax with all OW benefits so long as it's a OW member does not mean that CX might not be ready to leave OW at the drop of a hat. (I don't personally believe it's that bad, but that doesn't mean that CX is a fervent believer either.)
__________________
BAEC Tier Points: a quick reference table.
BA 744: Internal codes. Retirements plan.
Globaliser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 27, 12, 4:30 am   #48
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Programs: QF Plat LTG, DJ Plat, GA Silv, HHon Diam, SPG Gold, APEC BTC
Posts: 2,018
Strong and Dixons era was good profit thanks to the back end of Ansett duopoly, and collapse and high dividends. Unfortunately these dividends came at the expense of new aircraft - 9 747s in the late 90s was about it for QFi which has resulted in some of the issues today.

In those days the main International competitors were the similar high cost legacy end of line Euro carriers.. Now it's middle eastern, se asian and growing from the Chinese... The world has changed substantially... QFi hasn't, if it doesn't it will pull the rest of the company down with it.
moa999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 27, 12, 4:32 am   #49
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Programs: QF Plat LTG, DJ Plat, GA Silv, HHon Diam, SPG Gold, APEC BTC
Posts: 2,018
I also disagree with the comment on CX.
Whilst CX may not play nice with QF and BA all the time, they are sponsoring MH, from whom they probably face more competition than any other oneworld airline.

Certainly though letting both China Eastern and Southern go to SkyTeam was a mistake.
moa999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 27, 12, 8:42 am   #50
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold(OWE), AFKL E+, QF LTG, A3*G, BD-G, PC Amb/Plat, SW-G, Hertz 5*
Posts: 8,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by moa999 View Post
I also disagree with the comment on CX.
Whilst CX may not play nice with QF and BA all the time, they are sponsoring MH, from whom they probably face more competition than any other oneworld airline.

Certainly though letting both China Eastern and Southern go to SkyTeam was a mistake.
I believe MH is being sponsored by QF rather than CX.
Traveloguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 27, 12, 8:55 am   #51
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,513
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by moa999 View Post
I also disagree with the comment on CX.
Whilst CX may not play nice with QF and BA all the time, they are sponsoring MH, from whom they probably face more competition than any other oneworld airline.

Certainly though letting both China Eastern and Southern go to SkyTeam was a mistake.
CX is sponsoring UL into oneworld.

Those two article I find are quite biased towards QF and BA. What about QF's plan to setu jet star in Asia. Other than BA and QF there are other airlines in Oneworld that are cooperating with CX just fine. I find it ridiculous to say CX is pulling the plug here.
correctioncx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 27, 12, 9:09 am   #52
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 22,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by correctioncx View Post
I find it ridiculous to say CX is pulling the plug here.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that at present. There's no need to go all tabloid in relation to a longstanding and deep-seated tension within OW. The more measured and calibrated descriptions in that article may give some indications of the probabilities of certain moves being (or not being) made.
__________________
BAEC Tier Points: a quick reference table.
BA 744: Internal codes. Retirements plan.
Globaliser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 27, 12, 10:05 am   #53
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: E
Programs: MSC (Miles Slut Club)
Posts: 2,245
I still think CX is the best bet even there are differences between QF and CX. We know for a fact that last decade the main difference between QF and CX is: CX is always trying to provide better services and products, admitly they may made some drawbacks. Whereas QF is constantly downgrade themselves and jetstarise product offerings. But besides that a tie up between QF and CX have many positive effects to QF.

1) a better matched products offering on board in terms of service classes

EK only offers two or three classes on its aircrafts where CX is offering PE from this year. So QF could easily sell PE tickets from major Airports through to many European ports. Where a EK tie up may make some PE fare payer goes into the dreadful economy seating and make people going away from QF.

2) an opportunities for both carrier to grow in Europe

QF could use EK s Eu network without a problem but it is unlikely to contribute to EK s future growth. And QF is already in down hand as QF seems to need to marry rich single EK but EK could easily attract many young flerts. A tie u between CX and QF could actually benefits both parties and contribute to their growth. CX could merge QF's network in CX's mini hub of Bangkok and Singapore. From Bangkok, QF could benefits CX's network to India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Not to mentione by added capacity from QF's feed. CX may be ale to increase capacity into London, Frankfurt, Paris, Amsterdam and add new destinations such as Berlin, Manchester, Zurich and even Madrid.

3) an exit strategy for Perth and Adelaide

If QFi is to exit both ports it is an opportunity for they to do so on cooperation with CX. As QF could still fly to Singapore from both cities where they could have multiple connections with CX to Hong Kong and beyond. As well as keeping the arrangement with BA to continue to London. Especially of Perth to Japan run. A transit point in Hong Kong is not too bad.

4) more Asian destinations for QF

Taipei, Seoul, Chengdu to name a few. With the seedless transfers in both Singapore and Hong Kong, QF could free more A330 to use on other Asian ports they intends to fly. A daily to Beijing, Canton and KL would be nice.

5) closer tie between China and AU would benefits Qantas in long run

CX may not have the mainland China covered. but CX is the one of the biggest carrier for mainland Chinese, especially those flying high fares out from China to the world. Many rich Chinese enjoys a night out or bloody shopping in Hong Kong when they go to overseas. Many factory owners in Delta area enjoy flying out from Hong Kong compare to Guangzhou. And interestingly many those same factory owners intends or already have immigrated to Australia or New Zealand. If QF always claim the future of QFi is in Asia and China. Why not do something now?

6) EK is unlikely to join OneWorld any time

OneWorld do not need to be the biggest nor does EK need to join OneWorld. QF would be better off to explore existing partners opportunities to grow together!

7) JetStar Asia will meet its deadlock

With Air Asia Going stronger and stronger. The room for JetStar to grow is very much limited in Asia now. Within three four years JetStar Asia will meet its turning point toward the decline. The model of JetStar operating is not popular in Asia. Customers already made their choice. And not to forget the Singapore still have strict visa restriction to majority Chinese which will not help the growth of JetStar. Whereas KL and Bangkok are more friendlier to Chinese travellers. Thus to move hubs to more liberated hong kong to be in bed with Hong Kong would be ideal.
__________________
My 2014 wishes: oneworld to recruit Emirates and one Chinese airline!
chongcao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 27, 12, 8:59 pm   #54
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Posts: 921
Quote:
Originally Posted by chongcao View Post
I still think CX is the best bet even there are differences between QF and CX. We know for a fact that last decade the main difference between QF and CX is: CX is always trying to provide better services and products, admitly they may made some drawbacks. Whereas QF is constantly downgrade themselves and jetstarise product offerings. But besides that a tie up between QF and CX have many positive effects to QF.

1) a better matched products offering on board in terms of service classes

EK only offers two or three classes on its aircrafts where CX is offering PE from this year. So QF could easily sell PE tickets from major Airports through to many European ports. Where a EK tie up may make some PE fare payer goes into the dreadful economy seating and make people going away from QF.

2) an opportunities for both carrier to grow in Europe

QF could use EK s Eu network without a problem but it is unlikely to contribute to EK s future growth. And QF is already in down hand as QF seems to need to marry rich single EK but EK could easily attract many young flerts. A tie u between CX and QF could actually benefits both parties and contribute to their growth. CX could merge QF's network in CX's mini hub of Bangkok and Singapore. From Bangkok, QF could benefits CX's network to India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka. Not to mentione by added capacity from QF's feed. CX may be ale to increase capacity into London, Frankfurt, Paris, Amsterdam and add new destinations such as Berlin, Manchester, Zurich and even Madrid.

3) an exit strategy for Perth and Adelaide

If QFi is to exit both ports it is an opportunity for they to do so on cooperation with CX. As QF could still fly to Singapore from both cities where they could have multiple connections with CX to Hong Kong and beyond. As well as keeping the arrangement with BA to continue to London. Especially of Perth to Japan run. A transit point in Hong Kong is not too bad.

4) more Asian destinations for QF

Taipei, Seoul, Chengdu to name a few. With the seedless transfers in both Singapore and Hong Kong, QF could free more A330 to use on other Asian ports they intends to fly. A daily to Beijing, Canton and KL would be nice.

5) closer tie between China and AU would benefits Qantas in long run

CX may not have the mainland China covered. but CX is the one of the biggest carrier for mainland Chinese, especially those flying high fares out from China to the world. Many rich Chinese enjoys a night out or bloody shopping in Hong Kong when they go to overseas. Many factory owners in Delta area enjoy flying out from Hong Kong compare to Guangzhou. And interestingly many those same factory owners intends or already have immigrated to Australia or New Zealand. If QF always claim the future of QFi is in Asia and China. Why not do something now?

6) EK is unlikely to join OneWorld any time

OneWorld do not need to be the biggest nor does EK need to join OneWorld. QF would be better off to explore existing partners opportunities to grow together!

7) JetStar Asia will meet its deadlock

With Air Asia Going stronger and stronger. The room for JetStar to grow is very much limited in Asia now. Within three four years JetStar Asia will meet its turning point toward the decline. The model of JetStar operating is not popular in Asia. Customers already made their choice. And not to forget the Singapore still have strict visa restriction to majority Chinese which will not help the growth of JetStar. Whereas KL and Bangkok are more friendlier to Chinese travellers. Thus to move hubs to more liberated hong kong to be in bed with Hong Kong would be ideal.
I'm sorry but your analysis is far too reasoned and logical for QF management.
Platinum A332 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 28, 12, 4:37 am   #55
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Wellington
Programs: QF (WP), NZ (Silver KC), TG ROP (Forgotten), OZ (Silver), AA (Cardboard), EK (Lowest of the Low)
Posts: 4,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by number_6 View Post
Actually, they can't

EK flies to NZ for a simple reason: it is cheaper than renting space to leave the planes on the ground in SYD and MEL. A rather unique situation, but if need be EK would fly empty to NZ (or maybe they'd make a deal with AVV to hangar the planes). Fascinating industry, this running an airline. As an aside, QF does the opposite at LAX.
What charges are you referring to?
I seriously find this possible and have looked at the two airports sites to see if they have information regarding parking charges.
SYD $38.50 (GST inc) per 15 minutes sydneyairport.com.au Table of Charges
MEL Free if you have an Air Services Agreement with the Airport or less than 48 hours for those without one, but can be up to $50 (GST inc.) per 15 minutes melbourneairport.com.au Schedule of Charges
Really number_6 statements such as yours belongs to a.net
EK fly to NZ as it is part of its global strategy, nothing more or less.
Blackcloud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 28, 12, 4:55 am   #56
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackcloud View Post
What charges are you referring to?
I seriously find this possible and have looked at the two airports sites to see if they have information regarding parking charges.
SYD $38.50 (GST inc) per 15 minutes sydneyairport.com.au Table of Charges
MEL Free if you have an Air Services Agreement with the Airport or less than 48 hours for those without one, but can be up to $50 (GST inc.) per 15 minutes melbourneairport.com.au Schedule of Charges
Really number_6 statements such as yours belongs to a.net
EK fly to NZ as it is part of its global strategy, nothing more or less.
What global strategy? Isn't NZ an Australian state?
correctioncx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 28, 12, 5:07 am   #57
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Wellington
Programs: QF (WP), NZ (Silver KC), TG ROP (Forgotten), OZ (Silver), AA (Cardboard), EK (Lowest of the Low)
Posts: 4,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by correctioncx View Post
What global strategy? Isn't NZ an Australian state?
I wish it was.....this is coming from an Australian living in WLG.
Blackcloud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 28, 12, 5:31 pm   #58
Original Member
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Portland OR Double Emerald (QF and AA), DL PM/MM, Starwood Plat
Posts: 17,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackcloud View Post
What charges are you referring to?
I seriously find this possible and have looked at the two airports sites to see if they have information regarding parking charges.
SYD $38.50 (GST inc) per 15 minutes sydneyairport.com.au Table of Charges
MEL Free if you have an Air Services Agreement with the Airport or less than 48 hours for those without one, but can be up to $50 (GST inc.) per 15 minutes melbourneairport.com.au Schedule of Charges
Really number_6 statements such as yours belongs to a.net
EK fly to NZ as it is part of its global strategy, nothing more or less.
Those are the non-curfew rates The devil is in the details, but in any case there are many other costs involved; the net is that flying to NZ is profitable even with very low yields and pax loads for EK. Certainly not a normal situation (and my suggestion of AVV was facetious, a dig at that airport operator and the VIC gov't plan to spend close to a billion dollars for train service to AVV while having none for MEL). While you may not like the answer, it happens to be correct.
number_6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 29, 12, 5:19 pm   #59
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Programs: Gulf Air Gold for Life; Qantas Platinum(LTS. 83% LTG)Oneworld Emerald. Hyatt Platinum
Posts: 1,435
I'd be much happier with a CX arrangement. HKG and CX's hard and soft product are consistently high end. EK's fluctuate dramatically!

What most people fall for with EK is the glitzy marketing. Does not always show when flying with them. Some of the news reports written by brainwashed reporters make Emirates sound as though it were the godfather of airlines which has you in nirvana when you board. They need to get out from behind their desktops and fly EK a little more consistently.

My gut feel, and 2 cents, says Qatar if CX isn't an option.

Last edited by Cedar Jet; Jul 29, 12 at 6:57 pm.
Cedar Jet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 1, 12, 4:52 am   #60
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: OOL Australia
Programs: QFF (Silver), Skywards, Rapid Rewards,United, Velocity, Hilton Silver
Posts: 2,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by number_6 View Post
Those are the non-curfew rates The devil is in the details, but in any case there are many other costs involved; the net is that flying to NZ is profitable even with very low yields and pax loads for EK. Certainly not a normal situation (and my suggestion of AVV was facetious, a dig at that airport operator and the VIC gov't plan to spend close to a billion dollars for train service to AVV while having none for MEL). While you may not like the answer, it happens to be correct.
MEL already has an excellent bus service,
__________________
If God had really intended men to fly, He'd make it easier to get to the airport. George Winters
Lonely Flyer is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Bookmarks


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:00 am.