Cathay Pacific---Will its onerous path lead to bankruptcy?
Sep 15, 2019, 5:42 pm
#76
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: New York
Programs: AA, CX, Hyatt, Marriott
Posts: 1,484
As a US-based pax I don't even know what is Flight Centre. 
With that, I know multiple coworkers based in Scandinavia who need to travel to South Pacific or HKG for meetings frequently go with Chinese carriers because of 1)lie flat and 2) price within their allowances.
With that, I know multiple coworkers based in Scandinavia who need to travel to South Pacific or HKG for meetings frequently go with Chinese carriers because of 1)lie flat and 2) price within their allowances.
Sep 15, 2019, 7:07 pm
#77
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Non-top tier Asia Miles member
Posts: 19,801
They're in Australia too.
Yes I heard companies allowing J but only at PRC carrier levels.
Sep 15, 2019, 8:05 pm
#78
Join Date: Sep 2008
Programs: A3 *G, AA exePlat, AS MVP 75k Gold, JL sapphire, UA silver
Posts: 4,035
if one has flown CZ/CA/MU, it would be fairly clear that there are fair share of non-ethnically chinese passengers.
while i dont fly a lot of chinese carriers, but i have had no problem whenever I had flown them.
I vowed not to fly MU/CZ domestic china .....
(because ST E+ has no lounge access within the same country) while CA allows *G to have lounge access.
while i dont fly a lot of chinese carriers, but i have had no problem whenever I had flown them.
I vowed not to fly MU/CZ domestic china .....
(because ST E+ has no lounge access within the same country) while CA allows *G to have lounge access.
Sep 15, 2019, 9:09 pm
#79
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 42,033
if one has flown CZ/CA/MU, it would be fairly clear that there are fair share of non-ethnically chinese passengers.
while i dont fly a lot of chinese carriers, but i have had no problem whenever I had flown them.
I vowed not to fly MU/CZ domestic china .....
(because ST E+ has no lounge access within the same country) while CA allows *G to have lounge access.
while i dont fly a lot of chinese carriers, but i have had no problem whenever I had flown them.
I vowed not to fly MU/CZ domestic china .....
(because ST E+ has no lounge access within the same country) while CA allows *G to have lounge access.
Sep 15, 2019, 9:12 pm
#80
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: CRK MNL
Programs: CX Gold
Posts: 1,287
This is very true. I have a very well off friend who flies with PRC carriers to the US because of the price. He doesn’t care about anenities or comfort, as long as it’s s the cheapest price for the route, he’ll fly it.
Sep 16, 2019, 2:05 am
#81
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,345
To be honest, many of the hooray Henry's in Swire / CX (who are overrepresented) may not even give a damn about the protests or Hong Kong - as long as it doesn't affect their livelihood. Didn't Chris Kempis hit a protestor with his car then bang his door into a journalist a few weeks ago?
No point paying extra just to "donate" to CX, might as well protect your own interests as a consumer and go for the best value!
No point paying extra just to "donate" to CX, might as well protect your own interests as a consumer and go for the best value!
Sep 16, 2019, 5:50 am
#85
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 415
My personal take on this issue focus on two front. The first front is when CAAC recalled CX management it was done through Central and Southern bureau. It is highly unusual as normally HK, Macau and Taiwan affairs related to aviation is done at the CAAC headquarter level. There is a special office in Beijing I believe. The second front is that CX was singled out among many possible HK entities, after CX bought Hong Kong Express, part of Hong Kong Airlines, which is part of HNA group. During the take over talks, there are raids of offices and disagreement with CEOs etc. Interested party can look back from news archives.
From above two fronts I mentioned, I do not see any possibility of further actions from CAAC bar from few minor requests. Is the harassment from CAAC a political motivation for punish CX purchase of UO which in turn helped hot potato HNA? Was the involvement of Central and Southern bureau a reminder for CX not to interfere possible Oneworld membership of China Southern?
I don't know. But, one of CXs shareholder CITIC is facing some financial difficulties, one of its subsidiary in Beijing is going through bankruptcy. As CNY loosing value slowly, CITIC, a giant that is backed by Chinese government, needs CX to pay great dividend in order to meet its target.
In the mean time, Air China has been very quiet. If any past experience shows, Air China would move in sync with CAAC and has to make some noise as one of the biggest shareholder. None. Air China reletively kept quiet shows that the meeting with CX management is a Central and Southern bureau stunt.
Again, under the new reality of weak Yuan and soft demand, Air China together with other Chinese carriers are cancelling onboard meals to save cost. It is not in Air China's interests to see CX perform badly nor Air China has the financial means to absorb CX.
Just my 2 Hong Kong dollars.
From above two fronts I mentioned, I do not see any possibility of further actions from CAAC bar from few minor requests. Is the harassment from CAAC a political motivation for punish CX purchase of UO which in turn helped hot potato HNA? Was the involvement of Central and Southern bureau a reminder for CX not to interfere possible Oneworld membership of China Southern?
I don't know. But, one of CXs shareholder CITIC is facing some financial difficulties, one of its subsidiary in Beijing is going through bankruptcy. As CNY loosing value slowly, CITIC, a giant that is backed by Chinese government, needs CX to pay great dividend in order to meet its target.
In the mean time, Air China has been very quiet. If any past experience shows, Air China would move in sync with CAAC and has to make some noise as one of the biggest shareholder. None. Air China reletively kept quiet shows that the meeting with CX management is a Central and Southern bureau stunt.
Again, under the new reality of weak Yuan and soft demand, Air China together with other Chinese carriers are cancelling onboard meals to save cost. It is not in Air China's interests to see CX perform badly nor Air China has the financial means to absorb CX.
Just my 2 Hong Kong dollars.
But It triggers my thought when you talked about 'Central and Southern bureau'. I will say it is more like a harassment from the airline based in Guangzhou. Membership of OW for CZ can be a reason for this harassment, but it seems that CX has already vetoed it and CZ finally finds an opportunity for their revenge. Please keep in mind that CZ says that they will not consider joining any alliance for now.
And yes I will say I don't see any further harassment from CAAC, but it is not because of CZ. The warning from CAAC came in the early August, when the central government took a tougher line on HK protesters. At that time, the national TV and newspaper of China fully unleashed their propaganda and broadcast the videos of PLA and riot police everyday, threatening sending tanks to streets in Hong Kong. Cathay Pacific is one of the victims in this period.
But from the late August, the central government changed their strategy and had to soften their stance since the so-called 'Foreign Forces' really stepped in. A further harassment for Cathay is not consistent their current strategy.
By the way, I have read your remarks on one Chinese aviation forum recently lol
Sep 16, 2019, 8:25 am
#86
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,752
Per the old adage, "price is what you pay, and value is what you get." I'd imagine most consumers would base their purchasing decisions based more on the perceived value proposition than emotion. Far as I'm concerned, I'd like to see more vigorous competition not only in HKG, but everywhere.
Sep 16, 2019, 9:51 am
#87
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 42,033
But It triggers my thought when you talked about 'Central and Southern bureau'. I will say it is more like a harassment from the airline based in Guangzhou. Membership of OW for CZ can be a reason for this harassment, but it seems that CX has already vetoed it and CZ finally finds an opportunity for their revenge. Please keep in mind that CZ says that they will not consider joining any alliance for now.
And yes I will say I don't see any further harassment from CAAC, but it is not because of CZ. The warning from CAAC came in the early August, when the central government took a tougher line on HK protesters. At that time, the national TV and newspaper of China fully unleashed their propaganda and broadcast the videos of PLA and riot police everyday, threatening sending tanks to streets in Hong Kong. Cathay Pacific is one of the victims in this period.
And yes I will say I don't see any further harassment from CAAC, but it is not because of CZ. The warning from CAAC came in the early August, when the central government took a tougher line on HK protesters. At that time, the national TV and newspaper of China fully unleashed their propaganda and broadcast the videos of PLA and riot police everyday, threatening sending tanks to streets in Hong Kong. Cathay Pacific is one of the victims in this period.
It will be interesting to watch their Beijing ramp up over the course of the next 6-12 months. My thinking is that the AA partnership alone isn't going to be sufficient to suck up all of the supply they are injecting into the market, but that OW membership wouldn't address their needs well even if it was on offer. I'm thinking more bilaterals, using AA as a reference marker (i.e. see how that pans out, and optimize accordingly).
Sep 19, 2019, 5:25 am
#88
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,477
I will say your point about HNA doesn't make sense to me. HNA has sold their assets these years, and the buyers of their subsidiaries include some local governments. It doesn't seem to be a big problem for Cathay to buy it.
But It triggers my thought when you talked about 'Central and Southern bureau'. I will say it is more like a harassment from the airline based in Guangzhou. Membership of OW for CZ can be a reason for this harassment, but it seems that CX has already vetoed it and CZ finally finds an opportunity for their revenge. Please keep in mind that CZ says that they will not consider joining any alliance for now.
And yes I will say I don't see any further harassment from CAAC, but it is not because of CZ. The warning from CAAC came in the early August, when the central government took a tougher line on HK protesters. At that time, the national TV and newspaper of China fully unleashed their propaganda and broadcast the videos of PLA and riot police everyday, threatening sending tanks to streets in Hong Kong. Cathay Pacific is one of the victims in this period.
But from the late August, the central government changed their strategy and had to soften their stance since the so-called 'Foreign Forces' really stepped in. A further harassment for Cathay is not consistent their current strategy.
By the way, I have read your remarks on one Chinese aviation forum recently lol
But It triggers my thought when you talked about 'Central and Southern bureau'. I will say it is more like a harassment from the airline based in Guangzhou. Membership of OW for CZ can be a reason for this harassment, but it seems that CX has already vetoed it and CZ finally finds an opportunity for their revenge. Please keep in mind that CZ says that they will not consider joining any alliance for now.
And yes I will say I don't see any further harassment from CAAC, but it is not because of CZ. The warning from CAAC came in the early August, when the central government took a tougher line on HK protesters. At that time, the national TV and newspaper of China fully unleashed their propaganda and broadcast the videos of PLA and riot police everyday, threatening sending tanks to streets in Hong Kong. Cathay Pacific is one of the victims in this period.
But from the late August, the central government changed their strategy and had to soften their stance since the so-called 'Foreign Forces' really stepped in. A further harassment for Cathay is not consistent their current strategy.
By the way, I have read your remarks on one Chinese aviation forum recently lol
But regarding HNA, the situation is very different and political. HNA still controls HKA and HKEX through shell companies when HKEX was sold. Even today, HNA is still suffering through HKA's clipped wings.
Cathay's purchase of HKEX may displeasure several levels. I can not post here nor the Chinese aviation forums as some of my speculation may deemed too political. Let us say, CITIC and HNA stands for different power plays. Cathay's rescue of HKEX is not what one side of the power wanted. However, again, that is speculation only, please don't take it seriously. What I will say, however, is that HNA's sale of local subsidiaries to various SOEs and local governments is fundamentally different from HKEX. How different? Let us just say one is approved from the top domestically and they are necessary to both seller and buyers. CX's case? You can judge on your own.
Sep 19, 2019, 8:54 pm
#89
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 415
Well, thank you for your suggestions and opinions. I think you could be right about CAAC and CZ. I will continue to monitor the situation and see what happens next.
But regarding HNA, the situation is very different and political. HNA still controls HKA and HKEX through shell companies when HKEX was sold. Even today, HNA is still suffering through HKA's clipped wings.
Cathay's purchase of HKEX may displeasure several levels. I can not post here nor the Chinese aviation forums as some of my speculation may deemed too political. Let us say, CITIC and HNA stands for different power plays. Cathay's rescue of HKEX is not what one side of the power wanted. However, again, that is speculation only, please don't take it seriously. What I will say, however, is that HNA's sale of local subsidiaries to various SOEs and local governments is fundamentally different from HKEX. How different? Let us just say one is approved from the top domestically and they are necessary to both seller and buyers. CX's case? You can judge on your own.
But regarding HNA, the situation is very different and political. HNA still controls HKA and HKEX through shell companies when HKEX was sold. Even today, HNA is still suffering through HKA's clipped wings.
Cathay's purchase of HKEX may displeasure several levels. I can not post here nor the Chinese aviation forums as some of my speculation may deemed too political. Let us say, CITIC and HNA stands for different power plays. Cathay's rescue of HKEX is not what one side of the power wanted. However, again, that is speculation only, please don't take it seriously. What I will say, however, is that HNA's sale of local subsidiaries to various SOEs and local governments is fundamentally different from HKEX. How different? Let us just say one is approved from the top domestically and they are necessary to both seller and buyers. CX's case? You can judge on your own.
Oct 19, 2019, 6:13 am
#90
Original Poster
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: YYZ
Programs: Aeroplan SE. AF-Plat
Posts: 617
So a load factor of 72% and a drop of 7.1% in passenger traffic. I wonder if we will be seeing more cancelled flights due to under utilization or equipment "lottery" on routes...I know Swire has deep pockets but still makes you wonder...