Originally Posted by
percysmith
I'm still not 100% sure why are Mainland travellers so keen on transitting HKG.
I would've thought CA/MU/CZ should do fleet expansion instead of CX - even with the tax arbitrage would travellers (tourists and migrants alike) really enjoy transitting HKG? The reduction of pax on the Golden Route shows HKG is not a desired transit.
And it should not be for a lack of takeoff slots.
The only plausible explanation is CAAC is limiting growth somehow. I'm not sure how long it will last.
Meanwhile CX and other carriers serving HKG will thrive.
I'm ambivalent about this phenomenon. On one hand as a miles holder there will be more frequencies on unpopular classes e.g. Premium Economy. OTOH buying a straight direct return for cash is costing me a lot more.
Well CZ/MU/CA does not have the wide coverage of cities as CX. So for places like ADL/PER/BNE/CNS, pax would still need to transit at SYD/MEL even if their flights from China are direct to Australia. Or those pax can transit at HKG. At least the Mandarin language issue would not be a problem when transitting at HKG on CX all the way. Would be harder at SYD/MEL and catching connecting flight on QF or VA.
Also there are people living in smaller cities in China which does not have direct flights to Australia, and instead of transitting at CAN/PVG/PEK they can transit at HKG.
Finally CX definitely has better service than CZ/CA/MU ....