kamchatsky

Maybe that is the reason why CX is considering F? If SQ can do it why not CX?

Having said that CX must be thinking all those Chinese b/millionaires are buying Sydney properties over last few years (very well known fact) and pay everything in cash, CX could see that they are probably willing to splurge for F. Afterall it is a "status" thing when you tell people that you are flying F ...

kamchatsky

+1

I've done midnight flights for Suites SIN-SYD and I could only sleep for about 4 hours before I have lobster for breakfast. But hey I LOVED SQ A380 Suites even with the short sleeping time and extra flying time and transit at SIN.

percysmith

Well if it is for status then CX/KA will have to increase (real) F availability to/from PRC also?

vantage03

I fly SYD-HKG regularly and am increasingly flying home on SQ via SIN in F/Suites.
In my small sample size of 4 flights HKG-SIN-SYD in F this calendar year, there has been at least 2 others (sometimes more) flying the exact same route in the First Class cabin.

Even with my personal experience aside, I just can't help but strongly believe that there is definitely a market for some First Class travel SYD-HKG.

Qantas couldn't make it work as their First Class cabin on the A380 is simply too big, but it would be nowhere near as difficult to do well with 1x 6 seater cabin per day.

I've been told by senior execs at QF that if they had one additional aircraft with a modern First Class cabin (i.e. not the 20yo First which remains on 2 747 aircraft) they would deploy it to HKG in a heartbeat. However, unfortunately that isn't the case, so I see a big opportunity for CX here.

QRC3288

Our of curiosity, how much do those SQ tickets cost?

I don't think it is a question whether or not demand is there...it seems there is. I think the question is just yield and opportunity cost. CX has said on numerous occasions the value of their 77H (only F longhaul plane) is maximized deploying it to North America. Highest yielding F routes in the system are LAX, SFO and JFK.

The SYD market in F is quite competitive. CX has a monopoly on LAX and JFK, and near monopoly on the entire New York market (a single UA 772 flies to EWR). CX can charge 30k USD for a cash F tickets to JFK. That is simply never going to happen to SYD, not even close.

I don't know how much slack there is in CX's 77H. If there is slack, maybe it gets deployed. But my point is it's not just a function of demand....it's about yield and opportunity cost of the plane.

When I read Ivan's remark in the link, I actually thought he was pretty obviously saying "no" to SYD F for the intermediate future. His language was just politically correct given the nature of the person asking the question (an Australian aviation magazine...).

JeCCo

Suites / First fares are around 50k HKD return, which is about the same as a C fare on CX

QRC3288

Wow...no wonder CX doesnt fly F to SYD!! That is a sweet deal!

To put in perspective, that's in the vicinity of what CX gets from AA for an AA award redeemer to/from JFK. Throw in a few full cash fares each flight to New Yorj and it seems pretty obvious why CX has avoided F to OZ for a long time. If you get higher yields with the same frames elsewhere....don't go fixing what ain't broken.

I'm sure the demand is there (as, honestly it is anywhere at the right price) but F pricing is darn competitive to and from SYD. Like I said above, if the 77H frames are available then maybe you can do it, but CX seems intent on throwing al their 77Hs to the US and premium Europe routes where presumably yields are a lot higher.

Anyway let's see.

kamchatsky

The only way CX will fly F to SYD is when all those A350s and other next gen aircraft arrives and replaces all the 77Ws to Europe/NA. Then they probably can throw ONE or more 77W with F to SYD.

The good thing about HKG-SYD is that 1 aircraft is enough to do round trip daily as the flight is 9-9:30 hours. Enough time for turnaround.

sscywong

Since W15 CX will fly 100/1 and 138/9 with 77G, and 110/1 and 161/2 with 330

77H has much less Y seats than 77G... And the Y seats is the reason why CX use 77G to replace the 33G on 100/1 and 138/9... So assume stable Y demand 77H unlikely on 100/1 and 138/9

For 110/1 and 161/2, I don't know if their J loading can justify adding F to these routes... If J not filling up enough flying a 77H doesn't make it cost justifiable

Awesom Andy

111 should be able to sustain a reasonable J loading, as it allows busy executives a full day in the SYD office the next day.

percysmith

Perhaps there is northern transit demand for F on Aus routes after all.

Arcanum

Is there a source for this? For comparison, LAX-FRA in F on LH was known to be around $1,000 and NRT-JFK in F around $450 back in 2013. I know each alliance is different, but I find it hard to believe AA pays CX the equivalent of $6,500 USD for an award seat in F.

Arcanum

Agreed.

It always amazes me how so many Australians think their (relatively small population-wise) country needs more service. From my rough calculation, CX has about 11 flights a day to Australia (PER x 1, ADL x 1, BNE x 1, CNS x 1, MEL x 3, and SYD x 4). In comparison, CX has about 13 flights a day to the US (LAX x 4, SFO x 3, ORD x 1, BOS x 1, JFK x 4) despite the fact that the US is a wealthier country with more corporate travel and a whopping 15 times the population.

In addition, I imagine much of the US-HK traffic is O&D, whereas many Australian flyers would be connecting, so their fares would be lower due to competition. Australia probably also has a higher proportion than the US of leisure travellers, who tend to buy Y instead of J or F.

When you consider those factors (plus the comparatively poor competition provided by US carriers), is it any wonder CX is able to turn a bigger profit sending their flagship aircraft to the US? That's not to say SYD couldn't sustain one flight a day with F, just that with limited aircraft available it makes more sense to use the A330/77G to Australia and send the 77H to the US.

LHR/MEL/Europe FF

Not so much 'more' service, but rather service with First class. SQ sends double and triple dailies to Australia - many with F cabins.

There is plenty of money in Australia. CX wouldn't send 11 flights a day if they weren't making money. Could one of those services support F? Probably, but I think the issue is higher yields to the USA/Europe.

QRC3288

YIKES!

Big mistake on my part....the number I heard is half that (about 25k HKD, or 12.5 hkd/sector). My maths went truly haywire....25 is half of 50, and somehow in my head I came out with the faulty calculation...oh man

Anyway, thx for pointing that out.

The yields to NA in F would still run circles around Australia traffic if F was introduced, but indeed CX cannot fill it all up with AA redeemers. They need (and have) some consistent cash business which is where the yield comes from.