Originally Posted by
Himeno
If QFi’s costs were in line with Asian/Middle Eastern carriers, would they still have pulled out of many destinations, or would they have found some other reason to cut back on own metal flights?
Eg, if QF had the cost base of (for example), TG, EK, EY, etc, would they still fly to FCO, AMS, CDG, MEX, ATH, BAH, MAD, etc?
I think the problem is just distance. You need three planes for example (or is it more?) to fly MEL-LHR or SYD-LHR given all the waiting times on the ground.
Any long haul jet needs to be in the sky to make money. If they had 5th freedom rights, or other initiatives then maybe better for them (imagine the possibilities if they could wet lease their aircraft to say BA to do a return LHR-JFK instead of having it sit on the tarmac for a full day in London).