Cathay Boy

This sounds good in theory, but very hard to pull off but kudos to HKG-SZN if they can pull off something similar. The luggage would need to travel by itself, but I can imagine the turn-around time to be great: say, your inter-airport transfer cannot be anything shorter than 4 hours. Given that they have to identify these luggage, off load to a special shipping agent to deliver, and actually driving it up to SZN.

Again, it's a possible solution to inter-airport cooperation, but again not convenience enough not to be a nuisance. There is still the problem that I have to waste 4+ hours between flight (instead of the current 1 hour connection time I enjoy within HKG), and I have to make my own transportation arrangement from HKG to SZN (unless they build a passenger inter-airport link, which I doubt.) Then the immigration check-in at both Luo-Wu and Lok Ma Chau would need to be significantly upgrades (not good to try to catch a plane with a hundred people in front of the custom line.)

Inter-luggage is a good start, but does not solve the issue.

stupidhead

Airline handles your luggage to your final destination on outbound flights and you make your way to ICN on ARex which is a 30 minute train ride. Normally, they'll print your international boarding pass at your origin point.

OZ has been pretty good about handling luggage so I'm not sure about how likely it is that they'll lose it. But they handle a lot of through luggage because pretty much ALL domestic Korean flights are out of Gimpo.

percysmith

The cost argument's no use.

I tried it on my (construction-related industry parents) - it's no use. Even tho I've been trying to say the airport's twice the cost of the XRL, almost twice of the existing airport at 1998 costs and represents a PE of 23.4X, they don't want to listen to naysayers. They even think I went over to long hair's side. They bought the Govt's "intangible benefit to the general economy" argument lock stock and barrel - we're gonna get the third runway.

kaka

sorry i dont get it. was it my english comprehension? I thought you've been for the 3rd runway since you believe the HKG-SZX connection wont work?

or you switched sides after doing the costing? but here you're saying the cost argument's no use(hinting that you've given in to the fact that HKG needs to burn cash like no tomorrow)

percysmith

I did wonder if we should raise landing fees to dissuade transit/LCC/PRC traffic

moondog

If you guys were to do that, not only would I fly to Shenzhen, but I'd also stay there. The HKG premium is insane enough at present; if it gets any worse, you're in danger of sealing your own grave (been to Lujiazui recently?).

Cathay Boy

I still think, at the end of the day, funneling pax to another airport at another city and in a way another sovereignty (since HKG and China have totally different immigration rules regarding foreign visitors) is a bad bad idea. Billions invested and little people will take advantage of it. At the end if SZN keep expanding and HKG stays put, then pax will simply use SZN as a transfer point rather than do the fly to HKG, travel to SZN style.

There really isn't any other option for HKG in this particular case in my opinion. Build another airport or watch SZN and CAN take business and tourism away from you.

moondog

It's SZX, fwiw.

percysmith

If they are so cost conscious, maybe we are financially wise to let them go. Keep those tourists who are profitable to us.

percysmith

I'm sorry, I don't get the Lujiazui analogy...can you elaborate?

I don't think it's grave sealing - if we have a scarce supply of anything, we'd expect prices to increase to reduce demand/increase supply until the market clears, won't we?

I'm not sure whether governments anywhere have to guarantee the ability for every traveller who wants to visit to be able to afford its airports. It would be like a government obligation/expectation of government to ease CBD congestion regardsless of cost. Being a HK taxpayer in his 30s I'm not too pleased if the Government doesn't spend our money wisely.

kaka

not trying to sound like we are ganging up, but neither do i

1) a few airports around do have high cost to access and nothing deters them to be less competitive. (Look at LHR)
2) surely putting landing fees up would do something to get more high value pax into hk. especially when we are, erm, running into capacity problems.
3) I'm sure the HK govt cannot spend our money wisely. turning on the AC with doors wide open whilst saying a tea mug is keeping the room too warm

moondog

I live in BJ (for now), and am therefore close to Big Brother. While LZJ is semi irrelevant now, as soon as the RMB becomes an open currency (~3 years from now), the game is over. HK will continue to exist, for sure, but SH is poised to replace it in the financial capacity.

shanghaiman

Sorry to appear subjective here. There are definitely merits to both sides of the arguments here. But I believe most people who care about the future of Hong Kong and jobs for the middle class will have to go with the 3rd terminal plan.

Linking up with Shenzhen is all fine and dandy from the traveler's perspective, but you are talking about putting more Hong Kong jobs into mainland China and further lowering the competitiveness of Hong Kong as a transportation hub.

This obviously does not matter if one weren't actually a Hong Konger, or if one were a rich banker etc who actually had the luxury to enjoy the few remaining dolphins on their private yachts.


To digress a little, having been based in China now for a few years, and looking from here from a passenger's, CX already seem to have lost half the war for China. Failure of them to secure a decent China partner means there is no intra-china connectivity.

Flying frequently back to Hong Kong, I increasingly find that I do so via Shenzhen already. Economy seats are way cheaper than CX. So it could be bearable as long as one doesn't eat during the short trip, read SCMP, or require a diet coke. Discounted (regional) first class seats are almost same as a CX/KA Y fare. Service is slowly getting better too.

IF CX doesn't wake up and continues to miss the China boat, then it looks to become a niche player in the long run...

kaka

i'm sorry but you are still talking in the POV of a PtP traveller. Lets say if there exist a bunch of MAN-WUH travellers, how would they tackle the problem?
Man-(train)-LHR-HKG-(a massive people mover in some kind w luggage)-SZX-WUH?
Man-(plane)-AMS-CAN-WUH?
Man-(plane, if it exists)-LHR-HKG-WUH

CX missing the china boat? I am not so sure. who owns 18.1% of air china? Sounds like a better deal than actually operating it? Afterall many Star and Sky operators do not run a profit.
it is just that if YOU, or any one of US, who wants to earn oneworld miles instead of star or sky, you have to transit at somewhere.

I have no proof or whatsoever, but my gut feeling is china is massively underpricing airport fees for "china" airlines, hence the lack of competitiveness of CX to you as a PtP traveller.

However, if a PVG traveller needs to get to LHR at some random obscure hours of a day, CX might just get there quicker, which is what oneworld is about. if one needs to spend like 3-4 hours getting to the right airport, would those airport still bring those value? Remember, Airport to town users do not need to take that train.

kaka

i'm very sorry about this (and this is about to get political but i try to hit it as light as possible to not affect this as an FT topic)

before we see any changes in chinese legal system and business ethics, I only see china being an exploitation hole for some people. and that, i do not see it happening in 3 years, nor even 30. Only when it burst once and the lack of policy will be seen to immobalize the place.

IF china money, CNY, is to become an open currency, Shanghai still do not exist as an incumbent to financial playing field of the world. it will take a piece of the cake, but not the bigger pieces.