HK Airlines + HK Express for SALE
#17
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,421
what if CX is the highest bidder
what if CA wants some return on its 30% investment in CX instead of the stupid loss making price war. gaining nothing for either party...
am sure this one was one the points of the CX-CA partnership from Swire's perspective, get the big boys in China on your side for HK matters....
am confident QR would also be pushing Swire to gain slot control at HKG- it just makes business sense ( am so glad QR is a shareholder now because it drastically reduces the threat of a CA takeover)
CX competes with more airlines at HKG than SQ does at SIN
are SQ fares over priced?
I highly doubt CX will be overpriced
although Hogg reckons CX fares will go up later this year so maybe some behind the scenes deal has informally occured?
what if CA wants some return on its 30% investment in CX instead of the stupid loss making price war. gaining nothing for either party...
am sure this one was one the points of the CX-CA partnership from Swire's perspective, get the big boys in China on your side for HK matters....
am confident QR would also be pushing Swire to gain slot control at HKG- it just makes business sense ( am so glad QR is a shareholder now because it drastically reduces the threat of a CA takeover)
CX competes with more airlines at HKG than SQ does at SIN
are SQ fares over priced?
I highly doubt CX will be overpriced
although Hogg reckons CX fares will go up later this year so maybe some behind the scenes deal has informally occured?
#18
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 291
what if CX is the highest bidder
what if CA wants some return on its 30% investment in CX instead of the stupid loss making price war. gaining nothing for either party...
am sure this one was one the points of the CX-CA partnership from Swire's perspective, get the big boys in China on your side for HK matters....
am confident QR would also be pushing Swire to gain slot control at HKG- it just makes business sense ( am so glad QR is a shareholder now because it drastically reduces the threat of a CA takeover)
CX competes with more airlines at HKG than SQ does at SIN
are SQ fares over priced?
I highly doubt CX will be overpriced
although Hogg reckons CX fares will go up later this year so maybe some behind the scenes deal has informally occured?
what if CA wants some return on its 30% investment in CX instead of the stupid loss making price war. gaining nothing for either party...
am sure this one was one the points of the CX-CA partnership from Swire's perspective, get the big boys in China on your side for HK matters....
am confident QR would also be pushing Swire to gain slot control at HKG- it just makes business sense ( am so glad QR is a shareholder now because it drastically reduces the threat of a CA takeover)
CX competes with more airlines at HKG than SQ does at SIN
are SQ fares over priced?
I highly doubt CX will be overpriced
although Hogg reckons CX fares will go up later this year so maybe some behind the scenes deal has informally occured?
HNA can use HX stake as a part of cooperation with other airlines which will help HNA for their longhaul growth.
It depends on how HNA view this transaction.
#22
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,421
#23
Bear in mind that a monopoly would imply one company dominating the market, but not necessarily the only firm in the market, at least in practice.
If CX buys Hong Kong Airlines and Hong Kong Express, all the passenger airlines in HK will be owned by CX, thus giving CX a monopoly power over the Hong Kong air routes. Given the many, considerably more favourable slots owned, CX would thus gain an ability to charge a premium over routes covered non-stop.
Given the barriers of entry that CX will be able to impose (owning majority of slots in slot-limited airport, having more non-stop flights, having the most desirable real-estate (lounges, gate slots in main terminal), and the having the most desirable time slots) CX does get the opportunity to deter other airlines from entering the market and expecting high revenue and/or profit from the route, and thus is in monopoly of the local airline market. Thus, the assumption would be that, CX will then be able to make abnormal profits. All of these are assumptions of a monopoly.
With HX charging much cheaper prices in HK right now, CX can't do that.
And no, CAN and SZX are not considered perfect substitutes to Hong Kong and many people are less likely to fly there and connect by other means to HK than for them to fly non-stop.
Thanks for your offer, but no, you can keep the economics book for yourself.
#26
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,421
I am referring to the market of Hong Kong based airlines, and no, a monopoly isn't necessarily a pure monopoly.
Bear in mind that a monopoly would imply one company dominating the market, but not necessarily the only firm in the market, at least in practice.
If CX buys Hong Kong Airlines and Hong Kong Express, all the passenger airlines in HK will be owned by CX, thus giving CX a monopoly power over the Hong Kong air routes. Given the many, considerably more favourable slots owned, CX would thus gain an ability to charge a premium over routes covered non-stop.
Given the barriers of entry that CX will be able to impose (owning majority of slots in slot-limited airport, having more non-stop flights, having the most desirable real-estate (lounges, gate slots in main terminal), and the having the most desirable time slots) CX does get the opportunity to deter other airlines from entering the market and expecting high revenue and/or profit from the route, and thus is in monopoly of the local airline market. Thus, the assumption would be that, CX will then be able to make abnormal profits. All of these are assumptions of a monopoly.
With HX charging much cheaper prices in HK right now, CX can't do that.
And no, CAN and SZX are not considered perfect substitutes to Hong Kong and many people are less likely to fly there and connect by other means to HK than for them to fly non-stop.
Thanks for your offer, but no, you can keep the economics book for yourself.
Bear in mind that a monopoly would imply one company dominating the market, but not necessarily the only firm in the market, at least in practice.
If CX buys Hong Kong Airlines and Hong Kong Express, all the passenger airlines in HK will be owned by CX, thus giving CX a monopoly power over the Hong Kong air routes. Given the many, considerably more favourable slots owned, CX would thus gain an ability to charge a premium over routes covered non-stop.
Given the barriers of entry that CX will be able to impose (owning majority of slots in slot-limited airport, having more non-stop flights, having the most desirable real-estate (lounges, gate slots in main terminal), and the having the most desirable time slots) CX does get the opportunity to deter other airlines from entering the market and expecting high revenue and/or profit from the route, and thus is in monopoly of the local airline market. Thus, the assumption would be that, CX will then be able to make abnormal profits. All of these are assumptions of a monopoly.
With HX charging much cheaper prices in HK right now, CX can't do that.
And no, CAN and SZX are not considered perfect substitutes to Hong Kong and many people are less likely to fly there and connect by other means to HK than for them to fly non-stop.
Thanks for your offer, but no, you can keep the economics book for yourself.
try Mankiv's blog
the market is the HK aviation market
not the "local" market
what next
Coke has a monopoly in the Mc Donalds market?!!
the only logical statement you made was barriers to entry
- which will be sorted with the third runway
#27
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 13,811
#28
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 291
#30
Suspended
Join Date: May 2006
Location: HKG
Programs: A3, TK *G; JL JGC; SPG,Hilton Gold
Posts: 9,952
anyone smart will not do a deal w them even if its free.