FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Cathay Pacific | Cathay (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/cathay-pacific-cathay-487/)
-   -   Some suggestions to CX (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/cathay-pacific-cathay/1136866-some-suggestions-cx.html)

derek2010 Oct 15, 2010 3:11 am

Some suggestions to CX
 
CX has now code-shared with JL for all HKG-Japan routes, as well as some Japan domestic routes.
Can the same idea to be used to establish code-sharing with BA for HKG-LHR & UK domestic routes, as well as QF for HKG-Australia & Australia domestic routes?
This can improve the relationship among CX, BA, QF and this helps to expand HKG as an alternative stopping point for Kangaroo Route other than SIN, BKK.

midlevels Oct 15, 2010 3:20 am

I would like to see CX codeshare with IT (future OW partner) between BKK-CCU.

SKRan Oct 15, 2010 3:52 am

This brings anti-competition issue.

oneworld currently dominates LHR-HKG - BA CX QF operates over 80% of the capacity but individually so they are still competeting (to a less degree tho).

British authorities wouldn't be able to justify such approval - it will damage customer's interests.

When CA CX KA codeshared all PEK-HKG routes, economy fare went rocket high and never came down.

derek2010 Oct 15, 2010 5:32 am

There are still some non-Oneworld airlines to compete for HKG-LHR route: VS, NZ. So, Oneworld is still not dominating the HKG-LHR route.

Wilbur Oct 15, 2010 7:08 am

It is hard to see QANTAS and CX cooperating like that, given their prickly relationship in the past.

IC6A Oct 15, 2010 7:47 am


Originally Posted by derek2010 (Post 14950031)
There are still some non-Oneworld airlines to compete for HKG-LHR route: VS, NZ. So, Oneworld is still not dominating the HKG-LHR route.

You have to look at the fact:

On any given day of the HKG-LHR non-stop market. There are:

CX 4 B744
BA 2 B744
QF 1 B744

So oneworld: 7 B744 daily

NZ 1 B744
VS 1 A346

So let us call it 2 B744 daily (or 1.76 B744 if you want to be more prescisely) for non oneworld

Which means oneworld has at least 78% market share on this route (by counting the available seats oneworld would top at least 82%). And you do not think this is dominant position?

brunos Oct 15, 2010 8:42 am

Let's hope that they do not cooperate. If they do fares will shoot up.

derek2010 Oct 15, 2010 9:16 am

But how about HKG-Australia routes? i think CX have to provide code-sharing with QF, so as to:
1. provide new routes under QF's code, like HKG-ADL, HKG-CNS.
2. compete with VS for HKG-SYD route.
3. provide CX an opportunity to do code-sharing for Australia domestic routes.

wandering_fred Oct 15, 2010 7:41 pm

I don't see CX and QF codeshares anytime soon.

HKG-PER is weekly 3x QF and 10x CX ( soon as I think as the OW scheduler is strange at the moment) and the only concession QF has made is they permit routing via SIN for the same fare with a CX coded (not QF code on CX metal) SIN-HKG.

Same for QF on the PER-NRT route (no QF code on JL metal SIN-NRT) though interestingly JL does have a codeshare PER-SIN on the QF flights.

Still seems QF management has forgotten PER exists.

Fred

Rejuvenated Oct 16, 2010 12:16 am


Originally Posted by IC6A (Post 14950537)
You have to look at the fact:

On any given day of the HKG-LHR non-stop market. There are:

CX 4 B744
BA 2 B744
QF 1 B744

BA used to operate 3 744s on this route. Albeit all 3 were evening HKG departures.

IC6A Oct 16, 2010 12:29 pm


Originally Posted by Rejuvenated (Post 14955152)
BA used to operate 3 744s on this route. Albeit all 3 were evening HKG departures.

Yes I know that. And I do not think BA will put the cancelled flight back since now all HKG non-stop carrier is enjoying better yield and higher price.

2008 you can find fares at £420 for non-stop
2009 it rised to £450 then further £480 after BA cancelled one flight
2010 it has been above £480 all the time and look out for 2011 is around £520-560.

Should VS put another flight online I think BA will response. And then there will be lower fares to HKG.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 5:16 pm.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.