Create Airlines of China forum
Nov 24, 2012, 12:56 pm
#16
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Southeast USA
Programs: various
Posts: 6,710
Yes, but you didn't answer how many of these airlines provide scheduled commercial passenger service. Within mainland China, I recognize (in addition to the major airlines you mention) Chengdu, Hainan, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Sichuan, and Tianjin, plus Dragonair and at least one carrier with Hong Kong in its name. The list includes one outfit that seems to mainly take people between HKG and a few locations in Kowloon or Central and a similar helicopter operator based in Macau.
With respect to the question at large, I am against a Greater China airlines forum, but would be OK with a forum for the PRC-based airlines EXCLUDING Taiwan, HK, and Macau. I think for now, there aren't any PRC airlines that individually have enough volume to warrant their own subforums...not even Air China. So a grouping of them should take care of FT needs for awhile. Taiwan and Macau airlines are operationally in a different universe with a different regulatory and economic environment, and mixing them up in a forum with the PRC airlines will cause more confusion than enlightenment. Cathay/Dragonair needs to stay as is due to volume and custom. HK Airlines and HK Express could be put in the PRC Airlines forum due to their ownership by Hainan and their primary focus on HK-PRC routes. Or they could be excluded, I'm not fussed either way.
However, I am not that convinced there really is a need for a PRC-based Airlines forum, and would be content to leave things as they are for the foreseeable future.
Nov 24, 2012, 1:52 pm
#17
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: Gold, plat, diamond and more
Posts: 3,360
I am neutral to the creation of a PRC-based airlines forum since I don't know much about them. However, if there were a China-based airlines forum, I don't think it's any good idea to included Taiwanese airlines. The forum name itself could cause some problems. 
Even there's currently a China Forum, FT and formal TBers are wise enough to have (destination) Taiwan topics rest in Asia Forum, so there's no chance for any political muddy water to get through. Taiwanese airlines are doing fine in our Other Asian, Australian and South Pacific Frequent Flyer Programs Forum.
Even with cross-strait agreement w/r/t direct flights between China and Taiwan, savvy FTers had argued not to include Taiwanese airlines in some previous similar proposal. As of today, those points are still valid:
Even there's currently a China Forum, FT and formal TBers are wise enough to have (destination) Taiwan topics rest in Asia Forum, so there's no chance for any political muddy water to get through. Taiwanese airlines are doing fine in our Other Asian, Australian and South Pacific Frequent Flyer Programs Forum.Even with cross-strait agreement w/r/t direct flights between China and Taiwan, savvy FTers had argued not to include Taiwanese airlines in some previous similar proposal. As of today, those points are still valid:
The forum name should make no valid objection. China and Taiwan-based airlines^
While it makes sense to discuss China in the China forum and Taiwan in the rest of Asia, partly due to political reasons- the same is not that relevant for something that crossboundary as airlines. I hear your argument that Taiwanese carriers do just fine in the generic forum, and I dont follow that. Thats contrary to the idea of having specific forums for user friendliness.
The cross-strait flight traffic has increased dramtically over the last few years. Regarding the mentioned year old counter arguments;
Originally Posted by coolfish1103
....
Taiwan Carriers...
They should stay inside the Other Asian, Australian and South Pacific Frequent Flyer Programs because:
1. Creates less confusions between Air China (CA) and China Airlines (CI).
2. Even though most Chinese do not agree Taiwan is a country by it's own, but the frequent fliers do know that they are based at different places and currently does not have a direct route linking except Hong Kong and Macau.
3. Make use of the Other Asian, Australian and South Pacific Frequent Flyer Programs as CI/BR are frequently discussed in the section, while others are not as often.
....
Taiwan Carriers...
They should stay inside the Other Asian, Australian and South Pacific Frequent Flyer Programs because:
1. Creates less confusions between Air China (CA) and China Airlines (CI).
2. Even though most Chinese do not agree Taiwan is a country by it's own, but the frequent fliers do know that they are based at different places and currently does not have a direct route linking except Hong Kong and Macau.
3. Make use of the Other Asian, Australian and South Pacific Frequent Flyer Programs as CI/BR are frequently discussed in the section, while others are not as often.
re 2: Im having trouble seeing the counterargument here, but we have established a dramatic increase in cross strait flights after this was written.
re 3 : Probably not meant as an argument, but more as an alternative (or rather status quo)
Originally Posted by dvs7310
I fully support an Airlines of China forum however this should include the mainland and the SARs only.
<snip>
I can't remember the last time I saw a post for Mandarin Airlines however there is a lot of traffic for BR and CI that really dominates the current Other Asian Airlines forum.
I fully support an Airlines of China forum however this should include the mainland and the SARs only.
<snip>
I can't remember the last time I saw a post for Mandarin Airlines however there is a lot of traffic for BR and CI that really dominates the current Other Asian Airlines forum.
Originally Posted by hserus
Yup. If you put the chinese and taiwanese airlines into a single forum, chances are you'll run into random nationalistic flamewars from both sides of the argument. Not worth the trouble.
Mainland + SAR carriers except CX/affiliates <- that'd be a tolerably thin forum
Yup. If you put the chinese and taiwanese airlines into a single forum, chances are you'll run into random nationalistic flamewars from both sides of the argument. Not worth the trouble.
Mainland + SAR carriers except CX/affiliates <- that'd be a tolerably thin forum
Originally Posted by jimbo99
On balance, I would keep things the way they are rather than trying to create new groupings.
I would only create new forums for traffic-heavy individual airlines - just as SQ, CX etc already have their own forums.
Even if there is a change, I agree with coolfish1103 about not creating a separate "Taiwanese airlines" grouping. CI and BR compete with each other - so the logic in putting them together is illusory.
On balance, I would keep things the way they are rather than trying to create new groupings.
I would only create new forums for traffic-heavy individual airlines - just as SQ, CX etc already have their own forums.
Even if there is a change, I agree with coolfish1103 about not creating a separate "Taiwanese airlines" grouping. CI and BR compete with each other - so the logic in putting them together is illusory.
Originally Posted by shanghaiman
I support leaving CX/KA alone and create a new forum for PRC-based airline only.
Having been based in China now for 6 years, it is apparent to me that PRC-based airlines are worlds apart vs HK and Taiwan-based airlines, despite that the territories remain "inalienable part of China".
Service issues aside, dynamics for PRC-based airlines are different in the way that they are driven much more by domestic business vs HK and Taiwan airlines. Being an frequent China traveler, I long to have a forum where one could discuss PRC based FFPs...
I support leaving CX/KA alone and create a new forum for PRC-based airline only.
Having been based in China now for 6 years, it is apparent to me that PRC-based airlines are worlds apart vs HK and Taiwan-based airlines, despite that the territories remain "inalienable part of China".
Service issues aside, dynamics for PRC-based airlines are different in the way that they are driven much more by domestic business vs HK and Taiwan airlines. Being an frequent China traveler, I long to have a forum where one could discuss PRC based FFPs...
Originally Posted by tarajim
I support a PRC only forum. I am CZ Silver and fly a lot of PRC airlines into a lot of PRC airports. Leave Taiwan and HK based airlines where they are..
I support a PRC only forum. I am CZ Silver and fly a lot of PRC airlines into a lot of PRC airports. Leave Taiwan and HK based airlines where they are..
Whats typical in such debates are lots of straymen, and we need to leave politics aside, think pragmatic and focus on solutions.
With that said, the proposal could be for China+ Taiwan, and if that fails another vote for China only. Or even go straight for China only if enough emotions prevail.
I did gather background from those old threads (2006,2008 and 2010) before starting out here, and by reading them one will see how the idea gradually matures. As I have outlined in OP the market is fundamentally different today with several chinese carriers joining the major alliances and even more establishing FFPs.
Last edited by travelkid; Nov 24, 2012 at 2:24 pm Reason: typo
Nov 24, 2012, 2:10 pm
#18
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Southeast USA
Programs: various
Posts: 6,710
Travelkid, what is your agenda?
Do you realize that you're not just giving your opinion, you're lecturing us on whatever your preconceived notions and rationalizations are, and why they make sense over our opinions? You seem to be trying to do a "force" job to make up an all-encompassing Greater China (including Taiwan) airline subforum, when a bunch of us are telling you it doesn't make sense right now, and different people have offered different reasons, mostly valid. Many of these people DO have a lot of experience with flying in this region and you might want to decide that they know more about what they are talking about than you do.
However, assuming this is a done deal already and solicitations of others' opinions are just window-dressing, have at it. Ultimately, the only thing each of us can control is whether to individually participate or not. The world is not going to spin any faster on its axis whether there is an FT Greater China subforum or not.
Do you realize that you're not just giving your opinion, you're lecturing us on whatever your preconceived notions and rationalizations are, and why they make sense over our opinions? You seem to be trying to do a "force" job to make up an all-encompassing Greater China (including Taiwan) airline subforum, when a bunch of us are telling you it doesn't make sense right now, and different people have offered different reasons, mostly valid. Many of these people DO have a lot of experience with flying in this region and you might want to decide that they know more about what they are talking about than you do.
However, assuming this is a done deal already and solicitations of others' opinions are just window-dressing, have at it. Ultimately, the only thing each of us can control is whether to individually participate or not. The world is not going to spin any faster on its axis whether there is an FT Greater China subforum or not.
Nov 24, 2012, 2:45 pm
#19
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: Gold, plat, diamond and more
Posts: 3,360
No agenda as such, but having been to China about 15 times over the last few years, Im planning to expand my horizon with further domestic travel and more travel in general on Chinese carriers. In that process it has struck me as odd that we havent gathered the info better.
Sorry about that, no lecturing. Absolutely all I say is just my opinion, and everyone can differ. I hope that arguments can be met by arguments, rather than any other hints. As you state yourself in general about my opinions its hard to reply. But I dont think I need more local flying experience for instance to say that competing carriers can very well be in the same forum. Im only using my personal logic when I see no problems to have carriers focusing on different aspects (domestic vs intnl) in the same forum, like everyone seem to be happy about having other legacy carries include their subsidiaries, or like CX/KA. Even South and North Korea are in the same forum. I dont see a problem. The trend in such discussions is that its always the most vocal opponents on a political issue that argue a separation. After working with mediation for years in war zones and former such, I dont buy the political reasons, at least not in this venue. But Im all open to any and all rational arguments. In any case I have absolutely no vote in this. Thats the TB.
Nothing is done at all. The only thing that is done is my personal opinion that we at minimum need an Airlines of China forum, whether Taiwanese are included or not. I would hope no one would choose to not participate in any FT forums of political reasons. As you say the world wont change, but hopefully it will be easier to access FFP info on Chinese carriers in English@:-)
Do you realize that you're not just giving your opinion, you're lecturing us on whatever your preconceived notions and rationalizations are, and why they make sense over our opinions? You seem to be trying to do a "force" job to make up an all-encompassing Greater China (including Taiwan) airline subforum, when a bunch of us are telling you it doesn't make sense right now, and different people have offered different reasons, mostly valid. Many of these people DO have a lot of experience with flying in this region and you might want to decide that they know more about what they are talking about than you do.
However, assuming this is a done deal already and solicitations of others' opinions are just window-dressing, have at it. Ultimately, the only thing each of us can control is whether to individually participate or not. The world is not going to spin any faster on its axis whether there is an FT Greater China subforum or not.
Nov 24, 2012, 2:50 pm
#20
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: Gold, plat, diamond and more
Posts: 3,360
I have no intention to force anything, and as such I wont advocate further to include Taiwanese carriers. I will leave that for others.
In any case what made me start was the interest in mainland Chinese carriers, which is a proposal I trully feel is benefitial to FT.
{timeout} ^
In any case what made me start was the interest in mainland Chinese carriers, which is a proposal I trully feel is benefitial to FT.
{timeout} ^
Nov 24, 2012, 2:53 pm
#21
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Home
Programs: AA, Delta, UA & thanks to FTers for my PC Gold!
Posts: 7,676
What jiejie said. ^
The reasons why Taiwan threads are discussed in Asia Forum are more than just political. They are for practical reasons. There is no point in discussing Taiwan tourism in China Forum. China and Taiwan both have their own regimes and different sets of regulations, customs and laws. I doubt all our China Ambassadors know Taiwan as well as China. Take tourist visas for example. For those who plan to visit Taiwan, they don't (& shouldn't) ask about how to obtain a Chinese visa (which is a very complicated issues itself) in China Forum. They should go to the official sites of Taiwanese government and/or get some pointers in our Asia Forum. As a matter of fact, for short stay, Taiwan offer visa-exempt entry to most countries, very different from China.
Same logic applies to the the discussion about airlines and their operation. PRC-based airlines and Taiwanese airlines are operated under different rules and governments. I supposed HK & Macau airlines don't share the same boat with PRC ones either. The increase in cross-strait flights doesn't change that fact. Not to mention cross-strait flights are not really any open market. The way you propose to include Taiwan, HK & Macau in "Airlines of China Forum" would only create more confusion, which I won't call it user-friendly.
The reason why I stated Taiwanese airlines threads are doing fine in their current Other Asian, Australian and South Pacific Frequent Flyer Programs Forum because unlike CX, I don't see enough traffic to justify creating a standalone forum for Taiwanese airlines. And they don't belong to a "China-based airlines forum" either.
Tell me how many people get to visit North Korea freely and end up asking questions on FT? Do I have to remind you why North Korea didn't get their own subforum when Korea Forum was discussed then later created?
Your proposal for "Airlines of China" forum has flaws and wouldn't work. Just accept it. FWIW, you do know we have an OMNI/PR Forum for anything and everything politics, right? Politics can be discussed on FT in one single forum and for those who are really into it, they don't seem to have problems finding the right forum.
... I would like to share my opinion on these counterarguments.
The forum name should make no valid objection. China and Taiwan-based airlines^
While it makes sense to discuss China in the China forum and Taiwan in the rest of Asia, partly due to political reasons- the same is not that relevant for something that crossboundary as airlines. I hear your argument that Taiwanese carriers do just fine in the generic forum, and I dont follow that. Thats contrary to the idea of having specific forums for user friendliness.
The forum name should make no valid objection. China and Taiwan-based airlines^
While it makes sense to discuss China in the China forum and Taiwan in the rest of Asia, partly due to political reasons- the same is not that relevant for something that crossboundary as airlines. I hear your argument that Taiwanese carriers do just fine in the generic forum, and I dont follow that. Thats contrary to the idea of having specific forums for user friendliness.
Same logic applies to the the discussion about airlines and their operation. PRC-based airlines and Taiwanese airlines are operated under different rules and governments. I supposed HK & Macau airlines don't share the same boat with PRC ones either. The increase in cross-strait flights doesn't change that fact. Not to mention cross-strait flights are not really any open market. The way you propose to include Taiwan, HK & Macau in "Airlines of China Forum" would only create more confusion, which I won't call it user-friendly.
The reason why I stated Taiwanese airlines threads are doing fine in their current Other Asian, Australian and South Pacific Frequent Flyer Programs Forum because unlike CX, I don't see enough traffic to justify creating a standalone forum for Taiwanese airlines. And they don't belong to a "China-based airlines forum" either.
Your proposal for "Airlines of China" forum has flaws and wouldn't work. Just accept it. FWIW, you do know we have an OMNI/PR Forum for anything and everything politics, right? Politics can be discussed on FT in one single forum and for those who are really into it, they don't seem to have problems finding the right forum.
Last edited by lin821; Nov 25, 2012 at 1:40 pm Reason: adding a quote, clarification and fixing a typo
Nov 24, 2012, 8:34 pm
#22
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: CPH, BKK
Programs: OZ*G, AZ Gold, Etihad Gold, SK*G, BA Silver
Posts: 1,014
I support
Nov 25, 2012, 6:30 am
#23
Join Date: Oct 2012
Programs: Dynasty Frequent Flyer (Elite Plus),Accor Platinum
Posts: 1,866
I agree with trying to widen the appeal to outside the Americas more 'traditional markets'.
Though best to keep the Taiwan airlines separate and yes it would make the other forum much more active.
So I say yes the PRC Airlines forum.
Though best to keep the Taiwan airlines separate and yes it would make the other forum much more active.
So I say yes the PRC Airlines forum.
Nov 25, 2012, 8:23 am
#24
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,559
Im opposed, as the current "Other Asian Airlines" forum seems to meet the needs of users quite well. Not enough demand for a seperate forum as of yet. As others have mentioned, there is little interest in China FFPs themselves most current threads on PRC carriers are simple queries about equipment and seating.
also the posters in the combined forum who have a lot of overlapping knowledge of the different carriers across the region would be less likely to visit multiple forums after a split, resulting in a net loss to users. Much like the new Korea forum, which is a total ghost town.
Maybe down the road the PRC airlines could use their own forum but i dont really see the demand for it currently.
also the posters in the combined forum who have a lot of overlapping knowledge of the different carriers across the region would be less likely to visit multiple forums after a split, resulting in a net loss to users. Much like the new Korea forum, which is a total ghost town.
Maybe down the road the PRC airlines could use their own forum but i dont really see the demand for it currently.
Nov 25, 2012, 11:29 am
#25
Join Date: Oct 2004
Programs: Darth Vader of AMEX, A ladys best friend of Hilton, Pt78 of SPG, *G ,*S, ANA VIP
Posts: 3,931
yes please . china airlines is long overdue
Nov 25, 2012, 1:36 pm
#26
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Home
Programs: AA, Delta, UA & thanks to FTers for my PC Gold!
Posts: 7,676
also the posters in the combined forum who have a lot of overlapping knowledge of the different carriers across the region would be less likely to visit multiple forums after a split, resulting in a net loss to users. Much like the new Korea forum, which is a total ghost town.
Maybe down the road the PRC airlines could use their own forum but i dont really see the demand for it currently.
Maybe down the road the PRC airlines could use their own forum but i dont really see the demand for it currently.
Hopefully whatever "wrong decision/s" TBers have made in the past, TB will learn the lesson and not repeat the same mistakes. By listening to the feedback from those who actually and/or actively participate in forum discussion, TB can make informed & better decisions. :-:
Last edited by lin821; Nov 25, 2012 at 1:41 pm Reason: clarification
Nov 25, 2012, 4:40 pm
#27
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: KIX, ITM, UKB, YVR
Programs: Star Alliance - AC
Posts: 2,356
I am actually opposed.
Just means another forum one has to go through.
How would this be different from the Travel Destination China Forum? People will still end up asking the same questions about where to eat, visas, hotels etc. These questions will be appropriate in the Travel Destination China forum, not in the China forum.
FT membership is primarily an English speaking community. If FT membership goes to China regularly, usually they use their own countries carriers and their FF plan not a Chinese carrier's FF plan or use their alliance's FF plan.
Chinese FF plans are horrible. Therefore the best suggestion in an "Airlines of China" forum would be, - get out and register with a partner's alliance FF plan.
Just means another forum one has to go through.
How would this be different from the Travel Destination China Forum? People will still end up asking the same questions about where to eat, visas, hotels etc. These questions will be appropriate in the Travel Destination China forum, not in the China forum.
FT membership is primarily an English speaking community. If FT membership goes to China regularly, usually they use their own countries carriers and their FF plan not a Chinese carrier's FF plan or use their alliance's FF plan.
Chinese FF plans are horrible. Therefore the best suggestion in an "Airlines of China" forum would be, - get out and register with a partner's alliance FF plan.
Nov 25, 2012, 9:05 pm
#28
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Southeast USA
Programs: various
Posts: 6,710
Historical
Perhaps at this juncture, it would be useful to do a little analysis and get a sense of content and volume, at least based on recent history. I did a quick pass through the Other Asian, Australian, and South Pacific FFPs subforum for 2012 and identified the threads having to do with Airlines of the PRC (excluding Taiwan, HK, Macau). Summary:
Total subforum threads in 2012: 510
Total about Airlines of China: 133 = 26% of threads
Breakdown of Main content of these 133 threads, per original poster and in decreasing order of frequency:
1) Airline fleet, specific aircraft, product and/or service: 35
2) Airline contacts, booking, reservations, online, seat selection, fares, and paid upgrades (non-FFP related): 17
3) Transiting and layovers in Chinese airports, visa (less), procedures: 12
4) Baggage policies, limits, interlining: 11
5) Frequent Flyer Programs, mileage earns, Alliance-related: 10
6) General airline quality, safety, or comparative: 10
7) New routing/service announcements: 9
8) Lounges and Clubs: 8
9) Reviews, trip reports, opinions (non-questions): 7
10) Ticket policies, card billing, irrops policies: 6
11) Cust. Svc grumbles: booking, boarding denials, delays: 5
12) Promotion or award announcements, deals wanted: 3
Obviously this doesn't address posts per thread, nor am I interested in going to that level of detail, since I think it matters less. And I don't know if 2012 is representative or not of previous years. But using the assumption that it is, it's pretty clear that FFP issues have not been much of a priority with FT members so far.
So, given overall volume and this pattern of thread questions, does it still make sense to create a new subforum? Alternatively, could answers to some of the common questions that keep popping up be handled in a Sticky at the top of the existing forum?
Total subforum threads in 2012: 510
Total about Airlines of China: 133 = 26% of threads
Breakdown of Main content of these 133 threads, per original poster and in decreasing order of frequency:
1) Airline fleet, specific aircraft, product and/or service: 35
2) Airline contacts, booking, reservations, online, seat selection, fares, and paid upgrades (non-FFP related): 17
3) Transiting and layovers in Chinese airports, visa (less), procedures: 12
4) Baggage policies, limits, interlining: 11
5) Frequent Flyer Programs, mileage earns, Alliance-related: 10
6) General airline quality, safety, or comparative: 10
7) New routing/service announcements: 9
8) Lounges and Clubs: 8
9) Reviews, trip reports, opinions (non-questions): 7
10) Ticket policies, card billing, irrops policies: 6
11) Cust. Svc grumbles: booking, boarding denials, delays: 5
12) Promotion or award announcements, deals wanted: 3
Obviously this doesn't address posts per thread, nor am I interested in going to that level of detail, since I think it matters less. And I don't know if 2012 is representative or not of previous years. But using the assumption that it is, it's pretty clear that FFP issues have not been much of a priority with FT members so far.
So, given overall volume and this pattern of thread questions, does it still make sense to create a new subforum? Alternatively, could answers to some of the common questions that keep popping up be handled in a Sticky at the top of the existing forum?
Last edited by jiejie; Nov 25, 2012 at 9:11 pm
Nov 26, 2012, 9:01 am
#29
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,878
Being honest, this is one area where I have no experience in and currently no opinion so I will let the others post their +'s and -'s and formulate my opinion based on what I read
Nov 26, 2012, 9:16 am
#30
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,409
Being relieved of internal TB work, I found a better way to contribute to the community
Its time to rehash the old suggestion of an Airlines of China proposal. This has been half heartedly suggested several times over the years, but now the times have changed, so has the TB and the recent history of creating new forums as well.
I will try to put my thoughts into the form suggested by TB
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/11201697-post2.html
(IMO these guidelines are very poorly written, and I will likely suggest in a different thread that these are updated, unless TB itself is on the ball. Especially as this area seems to be the only area where TB has some "power", and it repeatedly generates member participation discussing new forums.)
1. Will the forum be (or is it now) beneficial to FlyerTalk?
To add some background:
Airlines of India got a forum in 2007.
Airlines of Russia+ got a forum earlier this year.
Airlines of Hawaii has been on for longer than I managed to utilize the search function to verify.
Destination forum for China was created in 2006.
Airlines of India has been a great success. Airlines of Russia is only a few months old, hence not having that high volume yet, but personally I think its a great addition to FT. The China destination forum is a great success. For a country forum, only Japan and UK is bigger in terms of posts.
China is the second largest economy in the world, with a rapid growth for huge masses. Including travel and aviation.
China would in this proposal obviously include Hong Kong and Macau, and I choose to include Taiwan. Cathay (CX) already has a forum (which includes Dragonair/KA). I therefore suggest to include "including Taiwan, Hong Kong (exceot Cathay/Dragonair) and Macau" in the forum description.
I will get back to more numbers and math below but those sole facts alone; the sheer size and growth of Chinas economy including aviation industry and the success of the China forum lead to me to claim that its about due time to create an Airlines of China forum.
I feel this will be very benefitial to the current members of FT, and especially so helping FT become more international (see TB candidates voting platforms). There are huge groups of frequent flyers already in China, and with english being more and more widely spoken, and the chinese travellers going increasingly international such a forum creation on FT will potentially pave the way for a broader and more international FT with adding new members.
Both China Southern (CZ) and China Eastern (MU) are on top 10 lists of passengers flown worldwide. Both are Skyteam members, as well are China Airlines (CI) and Xiamen Airlines (MF).
*A has Air China (CA) with a great new F product as well. Shanghai Airlines (FM) recently left *A. But EVA Air (BR) is expected to join *A in 2013, and Shenzhen Airlines (ZH) is expected to join almost as I write.
There are also plenty of other non-alliance carriers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ublic_of_China for mainland China only.
Obviously in addition to plenty of main alliance airlines, equally many or more do have FFPs.
2. Will the new forum benefit a relationship with FlyerTalk? E.g., does the forum provide value for FT members, such as a friendly ear highly placed in the company
I really dont get this question. Maybe someone can help? As its involving a number of airlines its hard to say whether any of them will provide a lurker. this is probably something FT leadership should look into, trying to attract lurkers. That is if we feel thats benefitial. Some of the lurkers around do more harm than good, and makes it more difficult to discuss gems of the program in fear of closure as well.
3. Is FT the best place to discuss this subject?
For the english speaking crowd, yes. This is within the core value of FT, FFPs, so its a no-brainer to reply yes on this.
4. Is there a passionate following? This is essential in order to provide dedicated expert helpers to get questions answered.
The success of China forum, and the huge volume clearly indicates massive interest in travel to/within China. See also below.
5. Is a critical mass of posts and readers anticipated or existing? We need adequate traffic to keep everyone visiting frequently. One living forum is more valuable than two mostly dead ones.
It seems Chinese based airlines take up a rough 2/3 of all traffic in Other Asian, Australian and South Pacific Frequent Flyer Programs. And that is by far the biggest of the four "Other airlines.." forums. Any estimate based on this would give a rather medium sized forum just to jump-start.
6. Is this the best place on FlyerTalk for this subject? This is the classification issue. The answer depends primarily on achieving and maintaining critical mass. It also depends on whether or where the discussion might (or does) occur in the absence of the forum.
This is also mixed up with the above. But this discussion which is so specific to one region is today scattered around other asian carriers, as well as within their alliance partners forums, and China forum as well. Clearly it would be better to gather such information on one forum. It should be no problem to achieve critical mass considering several major carriers are within the proposal. Some of them may eventually even get their own forum.
Paging the community and TB for input^
Its time to rehash the old suggestion of an Airlines of China proposal. This has been half heartedly suggested several times over the years, but now the times have changed, so has the TB and the recent history of creating new forums as well.
I will try to put my thoughts into the form suggested by TB
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/11201697-post2.html
(IMO these guidelines are very poorly written, and I will likely suggest in a different thread that these are updated, unless TB itself is on the ball. Especially as this area seems to be the only area where TB has some "power", and it repeatedly generates member participation discussing new forums.)
1. Will the forum be (or is it now) beneficial to FlyerTalk?
To add some background:
Airlines of India got a forum in 2007.
Airlines of Russia+ got a forum earlier this year.
Airlines of Hawaii has been on for longer than I managed to utilize the search function to verify.
Destination forum for China was created in 2006.
Airlines of India has been a great success. Airlines of Russia is only a few months old, hence not having that high volume yet, but personally I think its a great addition to FT. The China destination forum is a great success. For a country forum, only Japan and UK is bigger in terms of posts.
China is the second largest economy in the world, with a rapid growth for huge masses. Including travel and aviation.
China would in this proposal obviously include Hong Kong and Macau, and I choose to include Taiwan. Cathay (CX) already has a forum (which includes Dragonair/KA). I therefore suggest to include "including Taiwan, Hong Kong (exceot Cathay/Dragonair) and Macau" in the forum description.
I will get back to more numbers and math below but those sole facts alone; the sheer size and growth of Chinas economy including aviation industry and the success of the China forum lead to me to claim that its about due time to create an Airlines of China forum.
I feel this will be very benefitial to the current members of FT, and especially so helping FT become more international (see TB candidates voting platforms). There are huge groups of frequent flyers already in China, and with english being more and more widely spoken, and the chinese travellers going increasingly international such a forum creation on FT will potentially pave the way for a broader and more international FT with adding new members.
Both China Southern (CZ) and China Eastern (MU) are on top 10 lists of passengers flown worldwide. Both are Skyteam members, as well are China Airlines (CI) and Xiamen Airlines (MF).
*A has Air China (CA) with a great new F product as well. Shanghai Airlines (FM) recently left *A. But EVA Air (BR) is expected to join *A in 2013, and Shenzhen Airlines (ZH) is expected to join almost as I write.
There are also plenty of other non-alliance carriers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ublic_of_China for mainland China only.
Obviously in addition to plenty of main alliance airlines, equally many or more do have FFPs.
2. Will the new forum benefit a relationship with FlyerTalk? E.g., does the forum provide value for FT members, such as a friendly ear highly placed in the company
I really dont get this question. Maybe someone can help? As its involving a number of airlines its hard to say whether any of them will provide a lurker. this is probably something FT leadership should look into, trying to attract lurkers. That is if we feel thats benefitial. Some of the lurkers around do more harm than good, and makes it more difficult to discuss gems of the program in fear of closure as well.
3. Is FT the best place to discuss this subject?
For the english speaking crowd, yes. This is within the core value of FT, FFPs, so its a no-brainer to reply yes on this.
4. Is there a passionate following? This is essential in order to provide dedicated expert helpers to get questions answered.
The success of China forum, and the huge volume clearly indicates massive interest in travel to/within China. See also below.
5. Is a critical mass of posts and readers anticipated or existing? We need adequate traffic to keep everyone visiting frequently. One living forum is more valuable than two mostly dead ones.
It seems Chinese based airlines take up a rough 2/3 of all traffic in Other Asian, Australian and South Pacific Frequent Flyer Programs. And that is by far the biggest of the four "Other airlines.." forums. Any estimate based on this would give a rather medium sized forum just to jump-start.
6. Is this the best place on FlyerTalk for this subject? This is the classification issue. The answer depends primarily on achieving and maintaining critical mass. It also depends on whether or where the discussion might (or does) occur in the absence of the forum.
This is also mixed up with the above. But this discussion which is so specific to one region is today scattered around other asian carriers, as well as within their alliance partners forums, and China forum as well. Clearly it would be better to gather such information on one forum. It should be no problem to achieve critical mass considering several major carriers are within the proposal. Some of them may eventually even get their own forum.
Paging the community and TB for input^
With all due respect, the China Master Transportation Thread, bottom of post #2 on Intercity Travel-Domestic Flights, has a listing of active PRC-based passenger airlines. There are a few more very minor players that have a couple of aircraft but are unlikely to be encountered by most FT'ers, and can be ignored for now. I believe it serves the FT purpose more than a wikipedia link.
With respect to the question at large, I am against a Greater China airlines forum, but would be OK with a forum for the PRC-based airlines EXCLUDING Taiwan, HK, and Macau. I think for now, there aren't any PRC airlines that individually have enough volume to warrant their own subforums...not even Air China. So a grouping of them should take care of FT needs for awhile. Taiwan and Macau airlines are operationally in a different universe with a different regulatory and economic environment, and mixing them up in a forum with the PRC airlines will cause more confusion than enlightenment. Cathay/Dragonair needs to stay as is due to volume and custom. HK Airlines and HK Express could be put in the PRC Airlines forum due to their ownership by Hainan and their primary focus on HK-PRC routes. Or they could be excluded, I'm not fussed either way.
However, I am not that convinced there really is a need for a PRC-based Airlines forum, and would be content to leave things as they are for the foreseeable future.
With respect to the question at large, I am against a Greater China airlines forum, but would be OK with a forum for the PRC-based airlines EXCLUDING Taiwan, HK, and Macau. I think for now, there aren't any PRC airlines that individually have enough volume to warrant their own subforums...not even Air China. So a grouping of them should take care of FT needs for awhile. Taiwan and Macau airlines are operationally in a different universe with a different regulatory and economic environment, and mixing them up in a forum with the PRC airlines will cause more confusion than enlightenment. Cathay/Dragonair needs to stay as is due to volume and custom. HK Airlines and HK Express could be put in the PRC Airlines forum due to their ownership by Hainan and their primary focus on HK-PRC routes. Or they could be excluded, I'm not fussed either way.
However, I am not that convinced there really is a need for a PRC-based Airlines forum, and would be content to leave things as they are for the foreseeable future.