I've read tons of "analyses" from that centre for aviation place, and while I totally disagree that anyone should take LCCs seriously*, some of their musings are agreeable.

CX thrives not on O&D but all of us flying through HKG, and also on invading someone else's home turf with a superior product (service, hardware, and now frequency). Given this & HKG's geographic location being suboptimal for certain routes...

it'd be nice if Cathay's expansion takes the form of fifth- and sixth-freedom routes! THIS is what they should use their CA "connection" for.:P

In other words, this is the EK/EY/QR model. Some might say that CX/SQ did it first, well then it's time to re-commit and up the ante.

*personal experience - I find that LCCs are never really cheaper. Just sayin'

That's often (not always) true in the U.S. and Europe after the LCCs have been in the market for a while. But only because the presence of the LCCs forces legacy carriers to pull their own prices down in line with the LCCs. Despite Asian LCCs like AirAsia or Cebu Pacific, I think that process is still only starting in Asia.

Speculating about new routes is fun. But CX probably faces a more substantial problem than its network -- deciding whether to beat the LCCs at their own game a la U.S. carriers that now offer much lower base fares than they used to (but more fees), or whether to go in a different direction a la BA's big J cabins.

ZRH will be nice, I recall it used to be a feeder flight to MAN as well.
CX did IST before but it didn't work out, but now it may work - I think more HK/Chinese people are more open to the middle east compare to the 90s.
I am thinking destination like MAD or BCN might be "interesting" but may not be economical.

40 years ago, WN's route network was planes flying DAL-HOU-SAT round-robin style.

Now, they handle a pretty decent swath of the US's domestic traffic.

AK has been in business, what, 10 years?

Underestimate what LCCs can do and you'll be here in 10 years wondering why CX hasn't got F cabins any more, and why the food just keeps getting worse and worse on the planes...

The bottom line is that a lot of people like buying coach seats on flights. Coach seats on flights might not be the most profitable ones, but the Y cabin is what makes frequencies and networks work for large airlines... and LCCs suck out coach passengers from larger airlines, and it's easier to do things like offer better timed frequencies when you're flying 4x on an A320 as an LCC instead of 1x on a widebody for a traditional airline (as well as adjust frequency to demand to the route).

It isn't just price of Y seats that LCCs compete on (for one thing "LC" doesn't mean low cost to the purchaser- it means lower cost to the operator).

I flew Air China 8 times this year, and the thought that it's even barely a 3-star airline is laughable. Awful service and food, their in-flight magazine has atrocious English, stupid rules which requires ALL smartphones to be off the entire flight, even while switched onto flight mode (can't even use it as MP3 player - was scolded and told to turn it off), and their Beijing lounge is huge but has terrible wifi (but their beef noodle is good). I would (and do) pay more just to be on CX/KA any day.

I would also pay more to fly CX than CA, but not THAT much more.

And yes, their smartphone rule is VERY ........, but I can assure you it's not enforced in their F international cabins, especially if you're the only passenger. They'll even happily make pictures of yourself eating their food.

And don't get me wrong, I've been flying in Y with them long haul as well. Their newer planes are really decent. Even when I didn't got an exit row seat, I've had acceptable leg room, and the food was good (ex PEK, PVG, MXP and NRT, as well as FRA and MUC)

So, all in all, while CA might not be on the exact same level than CX, if you see the value for money you get, it's not so easy to decide. If I can fly CA F for the same price than CX C, would you still go with CX C?

And that internet is a bit limited in the PRC is a well-known fact, and as you say, their food is pretty decent in their PEK lounge (especially the Business/*G part is on a very good level, while the F part could be better but is still ok)

And, as said, CA is one level under CX, as is Southern.

Have you tried Hainan airlines? I did, and I can say their product (both C and Y) is pretty good. I definitely liked it. And, again, their value for money is decent, definitely better than CX.

If CX is only slightly ahead, they can't charge double the price. If they're charging only slightly more, then it might work. Or if their alliance network would be great for connections within China. Which it is not. Both *A and ST have much better connections. Which leaves them with Int-Int traffic. For which EK, QR etc. have the better material and location for the "juicy" routes. So what to do?

The real issue is:

1. It is not PRC which does not allow CX/KA to build a hub.

2. Bringing a hub in PRC will not solve the issue. PRC's market is basically in a climate of M&As.

It is too late - especially I don't think CX has any "extra" money for capital investment, like building a hub.

Don't take SKYTRAX too seriously. VX, for example, earns the following award from SKYTRAX in 2012;

Best Domestic Airline North America
Best Low-Cost Airline North America
Best Staff Service North America

Do you know VX's SKYTRAX rating? Not rated.

This article is written by CAPA, guys who bring you "Copy And Paste Aviation" run by people with no airline industry experience. What would they know!

What type of pax are currently travelling HKG-MAN or vice versa? Not too many moons ago, CX sent a plane to MAN to literally pick up the school kids so they can fly home. If there are not enough premium traffic, then there's really not much point flying direct to MAN.

CX will go the same way as HKG. Down, down, down.
For Y pax, fares are 30% higher than any other carrier (to Europe) for a so so service, the MPC way worse than BA EC and now with direct Taiwan-Mainland flights the milk cow is dead. More worryingly flights from Europe or the US to China (even on mainland carriers) are more convenient and connections trough TPE are more and more attractive with CI in ST and BR getting soon to Star.
CX's only strength is the SEA, India network, and KA (for local HK people). Geographically and time wise transit trough HKG makes no sense and is a lost of $$ and time, plus most of the bizz is shifting to Northern China.
I believe CX can survive as a niche market carrier for HK, but I don't see how the airline makes sense in the greater picture with or without a 3rd runway.

ummm cathay has said they are carrying more passengers on the HK-Taiwan routes after cross strait flights

but seriously cheaper fares when HX join the battle.
They only cost HK$800 for a R/T HKG/TPE ticket now which is the lowest fare of all time

Will HX be around long?

why not?

I remember someone saying they are going bankrupt?