All of those are close together at the western end of Europe. What about those travelling to the rest of Europe. I don't know many people who want to fly over their destination (figuratively) fly for a couple of hours, connect and then fly another couple of hours back again
I suppose MH also flies to IST but I agree that that still leaves a big gap inbetween in Eastern Europe.
AY, flies to BKK, HKG, SIN and PVG for connections with QF. 45 destinations in Europe from HEL, though still has the double connection/stop issue as BA via LHR
AB, can connect with QF at FRA (currently). ~100 destinations in Europe/north Africa, although many are seasonal and no premium classes on short haul flights.
IB, ~40 destinations in Europe, though doesn’t fly to Asia and has no reasonable connection points with QF currently. MAD has same over flight problem as LHR.
RJ, currently connects with QF in BKK and HKG. 50 destinations in Europe/north Africa/middle east, though not all are daily.
QR, has flights to MEL and PER. ~50 destinations in Europe/north Africa/middle east.
CX, connects with QF in HKG, MEL, SYD, ADL, BNE, CNS, SIN, BKK and PER. 10 destinations in Europe/north Africa/middle east. CX hates QF...
QF would likely be better off getting a deal with QR instead of EK and starting some codeshares with AB.
Completely agree with Dave Noble on this one.
I cannot see what EK will get out of this, except may be eliminate a competitor, and I hope that the relationship does not pan out.
That CX is not as strong in Europe is a good argument to partner with Emirates. Dubai has great connections into Europe
As far as what LHR can do, a big issue I see is that there are a lot of other places in Europe where passengers may want to go to ; going via London to get to places like Rome, Athens etc is not exactly a great choice; Dubai gives a nice connecting point to avoid overflying ones destination.
I see lots of benefits to Qantas with an arrangement with EK, but have trouble seeing what great benefits EK gets out of the deal
Qantas is an airline in its own right; any alliance membership should not work to detriment of itself ; if having to worry about what other airlines think when trying to improve ones own position would suggest to me that the alliance is perhaps something not to be a member of
For sure DXB has great connections. But all this will do is allow EK to poach QF most premium and loyal flyers into Europe. That's why I think (not know, I understand I am being armchair CEO here) that working with an airline like QR would be much better as QR could be integrated with other oneworld alliance partners, such as CX.
A QF/EK partnership will be just that, a QF/EK partnership.
Last edited by Platinum A332; Aug 1, 12 at 1:16 am..
Programs: QF Plat LTG, DJ Plat, GA Silv, HHon Diam, SPG Gold, APEC BTC
Posts: 1,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Platinum A332
QF should partner with CX (I have mentioned several reasons before, plus these new ones).
- A SYD/MEL-HKG flight can use one aircraft per day, whereas a LHR flight requires 3 (even DXB requires 2).
- CX is not as strong in Europe, and can stand to gain from additional feeder traffic (to perhaps allow CX to increase their FRA services for example).
- Middle Eastern connections available via HKG with J/W/Y product (to DXB, AUH, BAH, RUH, JED) - also to AMM on RJ.
- If QR joins oneworld, they have very strong operations out of BKK, HKG, SIN and member-elect MH hub in KUL. QF could then do a JBA with QR and BA without jeopardising the relationship with existing partners.
CX is in the same boat as EK in my view.
CX already flies to most Australian ports, and with higher frequencies than QF, so what does QF bring it...
I'm sure QF would have loved to have more codeshares / rev shares with CX, and also likely that they wanted them involved in low cost ventures in HKG...
I suspect they got told where to jump.
I still think SQ and QF are the best fit, they are both premium++ airlines, good culture fit, together control so much capacity into AU which gives them some badly needed pricing power.. and both stand to lose massively from the success of middle-eastern carriers. SQ has decent routes into Europe, not as many as EK but I think enough for what QF needs. But I think SQ would need carrots from the Aust govt if it were to play ball... they have been knocked back so often before.
That route is no longer the cash cow it was before.
Correct - a few years back when SQ wanted rights, there were only two carriers, UA and QF, with UA having two flights daily and QFfour (plus an additional flight via AKL). Now there are four carriers, with an extra two flights a day, and when you factor in HA via HNL and NZ via AKL there is an oversupply on this route, can't see SQ being interested now.
Dave
__________________
There are TWO secrets to success: 1. Don't reveal everything you know........
I still think SQ and QF are the best fit, they are both premium++ airlines, good culture fit, together control so much capacity into AU which gives them some badly needed pricing power.. and both stand to lose massively from the success of middle-eastern carriers. SQ has decent routes into Europe, not as many as EK but I think enough for what QF needs. But I think SQ would need carrots from the Aust govt if it were to play ball... they have been knocked back so often before.
I'm surprised you say QF and SQ have similar cultures...The corporate cultures of QF and SQ seem very different to me. Both corporate cultures have good points and weak points but they are quite different.
CX is in the same boat as EK in my view.
CX already flies to most Australian ports, and with higher frequencies than QF, so what does QF bring it...
I'm sure QF would have loved to have more codeshares / rev shares with CX, and also likely that they wanted them involved in low cost ventures in HKG...
I suspect they got told where to jump.
That's the point why this potential partnership has not worked - CX would be good for QF, but QF have very little to offer CX, particularly when CX already offers so many frequencies into so many Australian cities.
AY, flies to BKK, HKG, SIN and PVG for connections with QF. 45 destinations in Europe from HEL, though still has the double connection/stop issue as BA via LHR
AB, can connect with QF at FRA (currently). ~100 destinations in Europe/north Africa, although many are seasonal and no premium classes on short haul flights.
IB, ~40 destinations in Europe, though doesn’t fly to Asia and has no reasonable connection points with QF currently. MAD has same over flight problem as LHR.
RJ, currently connects with QF in BKK and HKG. 50 destinations in Europe/north Africa/middle east, though not all are daily.
QR, has flights to MEL and PER. ~50 destinations in Europe/north Africa/middle east.
CX, connects with QF in HKG, MEL, SYD, ADL, BNE, CNS, SIN, BKK and PER. 10 destinations in Europe/north Africa/middle east. CX hates QF...
QF would likely be better off getting a deal with QR instead of EK and starting some codeshares with AB.
EK is already so strong in Australia that it does not really need QF. The possiblity of being able to steal QF's frequent flyer passengers must appeal to EK however, especially when they are being offered up by QF should this partnership come about. I am guessing EK may also want a code-share on trans-pacific flights so you could fly RTW on an EK ticket.
The best partner for QF in the ME would have been Etihad, which they HAD but QF let the partnership slip from their grasp. Etihad had the multiplicity of connections through the Middle East, but unlike EK was not as strong in Australia and were not already successful without QF. The Irish CEO was quoted at the time that they are commited to their BA partnership. But this was only about 2 years ago - could he not see the trend in the industry towards ME hubs. What are these people paid so much money for?
Programs: AF/KL Plat (ST E+), VA Gold, BA Gold (1W Em), and for collecting some left-over miles: LH M&M
Posts: 1,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyGreg
I still think SQ and QF are the best fit, they are both premium++ airlines, good culture fit, together control so much capacity into AU which gives them some badly needed pricing power.. and both stand to lose massively from the success of middle-eastern carriers. SQ has decent routes into Europe, not as many as EK but I think enough for what QF needs. But I think SQ would need carrots from the Aust govt if it were to play ball... they have been knocked back so often before.
Badly needed pricing power?
Tickets from Australia to Europe or the US are already ridiculously expensive, compared with tickets from Europe to Australia and, regarding Oz to US, compared with tickets from Europe to destinations 7000mi away.
If there is anything I do not want then it's more pricing power for tickets from Australia.
The Irish CEO was quoted at the time that they are commited to their BA partnership. But this was only about 2 years ago - could he not see the trend in the industry towards ME hubs. What are these people paid so much money for?
What's his supposed Irishness got to do with it?
And why generalise about "these people"? The good ones undoubtedly earn their keep, and more.
The fact that the current QF CEO isn't good at his job is personal to him, and has nothing to do with his national origins.
__________________ Training for thousands of hours for the Paralympics = Elite
Sitting for thousands of hours on an airline seat ≠ Elite
