http://www.flyertalk.com/the-tarmac/...y-pacific.html

Location is a huge difference. Hong Kong is right at the door step of China, the next explosion of market of air travel. Combined with Dragon Air that Cathay Pacific simply has too many options for SIA to effectively compete. Also, for an Asian Airline CX has a huge market in North America, and as Europe is slowing down that hurts SIA greatly.

Ultimately, SIA can't beat the location and convenience of Hong Kong.

There is still a way for SIA thought. Taiwan always want to be Singapore's best friend. Singapore Government can really try to twist Taiwan's arm and exchange friendship and more bilateral cooperation in return get Taiwan to allowed TPE to be SIA's "sub-hub." I am no expert in international airline laws but if this is allowed, say if SIA can offer something like this: JFK-TPE-PVG/PEK/CAN, etc. Then it can seriously challenge CX. Otherwise, dress those FAs as sexy as they want, have better hardware, better IFE, better food, it won't matter.... Can a foreign airline operates a hub out of another foreign nation?

I'm sure China Airlines and EVA would have something to say about that.

Sure, there are plenty of examples...maybe not full-blown hubs but a "focus city" op also counts. It's just that Taiwan-China is not available for that right now... "right now" being the operative phrase, cause I can picture it becoming available some day. But SIA is not going to have an edge over whoever else that's also launching.

Wasn't SIA a consultant for China Airlines at one point? Guess they blew that.

HKG isn't that optimal a location for certain flights either. If CX can get business out of people who would otherwise choose to fly direct, I don't see why Singapore's location should be an issue for SQ. I'd suggest the real problem that CAPA doesn't want to touch on (because it would kinda sorta fly against what CAPA always champions) is that SIA hasn't been as well-run as Cathay during the past decade and a half. They're not picking the right fights. They've got too many LCCs. They're not conservative & shrewd where it counts.

I remember always wanting to try SQ, but as a TW resident, I have never seen SQ offer a *sane* fare ever. The numbers are so far above every other airline, that I do a double-take and check my eyesight every time. My business kept going to CX & others because, well, SQ didn't want my business.

Whenever I've tried to connect into mainland China on CX through HKG, the schedules haven't worked. When I checked there weren't so many flights on CX, not counting Dragon Air. I was surprised as I had expected this to obviously be the best routing.

CX not but what's wrong with KA? CX doesn't fly to that many china cities

I think the LCC's have always been in HK, masked under a "full service" label like MU, CA, CZ, and their smaller friends.

that's the whole point of having KA to cover China more extensively for the CX group

haha - yeah!!

KA is really dominant to China- they are China's fourth largest international airline and is only a couple of thousand seats behind China eastern!!- SQ is not , hence CX has the advantage

also SQ fares are just crazy high

SQ still makes a profit though , and are financially healthier than CX

I would say narita is a full hub for many us airlines, particularly, united and delta...

haha brilliant a case of horse before the cart or in this case type and then think

Take a read at the latest CAPA report:

Singapore Airlines is falling behind Cathay Pacific as Asia's network airline giants diverge
http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...diverge-125074

On your note on financial health, let me remind you that CX also has a strong balance sheet and is in a very good financial health.

That's the article mentioned in this thread's first post !

Only because it's a States subsidized corporation.