http://www.etravelblackboard.com/art...s-for-may-2013

http://www.asiatraveltips.com/news13...gAirport.shtml

I have been tracking these numbers for a couple of years now and after a along time or for the first time CX passengers growth has not matched or been higher than HKG growth this trend has occurred in the past few months!
they actually had a drop in passengers in the last 2 months while HKG numbers grew!!!!

and for the first time CX passengers carried was less than 50% of HKG passengers- last year it was always around 51-54% of passengers at HKG
i.e passengers seem to be actively avoiding CX

Also if one takes into account Vancouver - JFK and the Japan Taipei routes the CX share in HKG is even lower
by CX I mean CX+KA

I wonder if CX will actually respond or just see their market share decline

anyways was just curious how many FF here have flown CX less this year than before

I don't think market share measured as a percentage of HKG volume is a valid measure as to the financial state of CX.

you are absolutely correct

but it does mean more people are choosing to avoid the carrier so I was wondering if anyone here was doing so more than before and eventually a declining market share will affect finances

New flights to destinations CX doesn't fly to? These statistics do not indicate that people are choosing CX less when they have a choice between CX and other airlines.

A more meaningful analysis would include something to do with profits.

This simple comparison can have complex causes:

1) CX doesn't fly to destinations that other airlines have expanded into. We know CX's strategy has always been frequency of existing ports over against expanding aggressively into new ports.

2) The rise of LCC or competitors offering cheaper fares at the HKG hub. At the end of the day, majority of people are "price-conscious" rather than "service-conscious" when it comes to flying. They look for the cheapest ticket.

I can list more but this isn't definitive to say CX is losing momentum, but it can be a ringing bell for CX to "wake up" to and pay attention more to their customers, especially their loyal frequent fliers that actually flies CX on a regular basis.

Isn't it the value of oneworld partnership and code-sharing agreements which should support CX in these markets that they do not fly to? If passengers chose another airlines over CX with its code-sharing connections, it probably signals that the agreements are not working to its max benefits

Compare to StarAlliance and SkyTeam the OneWorld alliance has the fewest airlines and least code-shared routes. It is no surprise, therefore, that more pax are taking other airlines over against CX/KA combo.

My employer for the most part lets me fly CX even with a price differential, but I can see how on my own money I might not be so tempted if I didn't have a reserve of >200k miles sitting around (thanks HK CC promos!) and millions of Petro Points

They are busy downsizing their Long Haul fleet faster than planned from 747s to 777's these basically require the same number of Pilots but offer 22% less passengers capacity.

Unless they had a few hundred trained 777 Air Crew hidden away in cupboards this is bound to have a significant effect on HKG Passenger figures at the moment.

Skyteam has TERRIBLE FFP options, though.
(Skypesos and Flying Poo come to mind...)

That huge leap you just took doesn't hold up logically. There are all sorts of reasons why CX's share of HKG traffic may have dropped, e.g., as alluded to upthread, destinations to which the only choice used to be a CX connection but which now may have direct service. It doesn't mean that passengers are avoiding CX. It means that, for one or more of numerous reasons, pax are choosing other carriers. Sort of like the question of whether Obama won the last election or Romney lost it. (IMO, Romney lost it.)

This is a perfect example of how you can make statistics say whatever you want them to say.

This 747-to-77W issue is an important point that shows how the capacity and "market share" figures OP is so obsessed with can be seriously deceiving. CX seem to have concluded that the 77W is more profitable to operate even if downgauging to a 77W on a route results in less overall capacity (and therefore less market share). Going from a 74K to a 77H loses nearly 100 Y seats. But if that means CX is able to pocket the higher-fare segment of the market without having to deep discount to fill the remaining 96 Y seats on the plane, while operating a more fuel-efficient aircraft, then it can still be good for the bottom line.

The fixation on this board with market share totally misses the point. In theory CX could build a 100% market share by starting on every route operated by any other carrier out of HKG and then deeply discounting every seat to draw every marginal pax. But why on earth would they do that?

I fly CX just to maintain silver now and find im flying other carriers more and more. Price is an example. To illustrate, HKG-CDG: CX was $20,000 HK for PY and $60,000 HK for J. I got a J seat on SQ for $33,000 HK.

SYD-HKG: QF in PY is $4,000 HK cheaper than CX. I can bring 40 kilos of luggage, they have dedicated FAs to PY and is more 'business lite'. The last time I tyravelled CX PY they didn't even do a water run and we had to use the econ toilet at the back of the plane.

CX does lose passenger revenue when switching for the 747 to the 777, but they do gain lower fuel costs.