So maybe that was a misread by the original poster who thought it read A350 was replaced by 737-MAX, but clearly he did not mean 737 is larger than A350? Not sure who is twisting the words here...

For the most part, people are FORWARD looking and not looking to the past when you kept claiming that CX has lost its competitiveness against SQ. Do I need to mention again that COVID happened, 2019 happened, Russia invasion happened and all that? We live in a different world now and in a very different environment now. What are you ranting on about is what I still don't understand. Whatever you are complaining about seems to be things that were resulted from past events. What people are talking here is about how current constraints are limiting the pace at which CX can recover in the near future. We've already moved on from the past and are on the road to recovery (as much as you disagree). There is no point to dwell on how much passengers CX has lost to SQ - without the aircraft, pilots and crew supply there's nothing CX can do to regain its competitiveness, which is something that takes time and I believe it's something CX is working on.

Who exactly are the 'they' to which you are referring ? it is extremely unlikely that anyone on here that posts regularly would ever confuse a 737 with a A350 -unless a typo.
In the real world as apposed to your rather odd and vagally concerning version of it Cathay is recovering from a 3 year lockdown rather well . A way to go yet but overall very good progress is being made.
New routes should not pose any major problems above what is the normal for most airlines now that Boeing is failing to deliver. However with new aircraft arriving every month or so CX should be able to further expend its route network as it is already doing..
It seems more illogical nonsense that you mention on one hand that the airline is not recovering its network and then that they are now short of aircraft !

Ach, I'm very sorry; yes, I had it backwards, SQ is actually moving from a 737 to an A350 on the Cairns route. They are still dropping one flight a week, though.

Unfortunately, instead of pointing out my actual error, NZflyer777 chose to characterize this as me claiming that a 737 was larger than an A350 in order to make a negative statement about the "CX is great and does no wrong crew." Not only did I not make this claim, but I am not part of such a "crew;" I have complained or made less than flattering remarks about CX on many occasions. I hope I am presenting a fair and nuanced perspective unlike NZflyer777, who seems only capable of seeing negatives.

for predominently leisure routes, frequency (daily) isnt as important as larger capacity to utilize the slot. Tourists are willing to compromise on schedule (1 less day to fly) in exchange for cheaper/available seats (more capacity)

as a time short traveller myself, i would always go for frequency. Not just because of choices but in times of IRROPS those extra scheduled birds will get me to my destination, so its more of an insuance play.

Think it’s getting quite old and tiresome seeing the constant doom and gloom outlook of Cathay. I think competition is good for everyone and especially for flyers be it thru cheaper fares or better service. I personally feel Cathay may have lost out some post pandemic opportunities to regional rivals and there’s still a bit of way to go but it’ll still be good to see them improve to keep their competition on their

interesting and if you look closely at their routes to the national capital region MNL T3 both are 4x daily yet beat Philippine Airlines PR300/301 502/501 Their competitor on MNL-HKG/SIN. I wonder how would that work with CX907 if CX ended up restoring CX899 EWR-HKG? because that flight from HKG-MNL at 7:00 a.m. is currently an A321-251N which gets connection from CX843 JFK-HKG. The obvious would have been something like this use the plane for CX843 to do CX907

I think currently robust O&D demand and strong Mainland Chinese passengers are dominating HKG-North America routes. Passengers from low yield regions are crowded out with current limited supply.

By the way SQ group operates 6 daily flights to MNL (4SQ 2TR) and CX group operates 7 daily flights (6CX 1UO).

I was thinking the same thing. If they can fill up the North America flights with O&D plus a handful of high yield Mainland markets, why would they bother focusing on MNL or CEB?

Precisely this! “Follow the money 💰”

Good that CRK will be CX and not UO.

Good news and speaking of CRK that's going to be helpful for passengers that live in These Provinces Bataan Pampanga Tarlac since it's a shorter drive to those places than MNL to catch CX MNL-HKG flights. My question is this when KA operated HKG-CRK Pre Covid-19 was it timed with CX899 EWR-HKG for PER it's CX170/144 or not? If yes once resumed then I can do EWR-HKG-CRK by combining that with CX899 if resumed.

EWR will take a good deal of time to resume.

depending on days, the KA flight from CRK departs either 10:00 or 10:55. You'll have around 12hrs to CX899. Plenty of time to go to the city and have some cheap HK food. It was my routine when CX (KA) still flies to CRK.

CX flights to the Philippines make sense for all the paid home visits of the helper being paid for by their bosses' Asian Miles. (2X check-in boxes).