Aspen

This morning's Sydney Morning Herald is tipping QF is about to abandon LAX-JFK, AKL-LAX and even HNL, EZE and Mumbai are at risk.

http://www.smh.com.au/business/qanta...724-1hvc9.html

I always thought there was good freight revenue to AND from NYC

doctorjosh

HNL makes sense, as JQ already fly there.
EZE would make better sense code-sharing with LA.
I never understood the the need to do AKL-LAX.
LAX-JFK would make more sense code-sharing with AA.
I suppose SIN-BOM can be code-shared with IT.

TPJ

Just wonder how much more than could actually axe... Slightly off topic - I flew from MEL to BKK the other day and looking at the departure board and I think out of about 50 daily international flights ex MEL, QF & JQ operate only 9. So out of Australia's second largest city their market share is something like 20% - the more they cut the less likely corporate clients will be willing to use them... Out of MEL you already have to be insane or have mostly domestic travel, to stick to QF...

Aspen

doctorjosh

QF will have also access to EZE through MH next year. So, no need to actually fly there themselves.

RJNYC

What ANZ/United deal? Was it part of ANZ joining Star or was it a gentlemen's agreement in exchange for UA dropping LAX-AKL?

RJNYC

Except that SYD-KUL-JNB-CPT-EZE is significantly longer than SYD-EZE.

belfordrocks

JFK-LAX could be done in coordination with AA- so put a Intl 772 on the route and codeshare with both AA and QF- giving QF F pax the AA's Intl flat bed.
HNL is not necessary as JQ already flies theer- but they should stick a QF code on the flight and market StarClass as premium economy (which it really is).
EZE should stay until they find a way to fly to GRU. It also depends if LATAM goes Oneworld or Star.
SIN-BOM should/could be redirected to KUL-BOM once MH join oneworld to offer greater connecting opprtunities- chuck a MH code on the flight.

Aspen

I cannot remember the exact timeline (i.e. were both routes abandoned simultaneously?)
IIRC: ANZ dropped LAX-SYD, UAL reduced capacity from a 744 to a 772, UAL dropped AKL-MEL and finally to continue servicing MEL UAL added a tag SYD-MEL-SYD to connect with both the LAX & SFO flights.

Himeno

I don't see how dropping flights is needed.
A good first step to "turn around" QFI would be to stop with shifting money around the QF group on paper to dump all the losses on QFI.

The biggest problem QF has is the age of its fleet and its fleet utilization. QF really should have gotten some version of the 777 when they had the chance, and there is little need to keep aircraft sitting around at out stations all over the world for 8-18 hours almost every day.
QF has route authorities and landing slots available all over the place that they currently don't use. Well, use them.

QFI needs to expand out of its problems, not contract and hand everything to JQ.

number_6

Well said, but it is clear that the current executive strategy is to contract out of the "unprofitable" routes. Rather ironically I can remember when some of those now unprofitable routes were making huge profits, circa 5 years ago.

QF justifies the poor aircraft utilization as extending the life of the 744s (which is certainly true); and that their crewing cost is not economic for tag-ends out of LAX and LHR. QF could do LAX-YYZ for example and has full traffic rights (i.e. could take LAX-YYZ traffic without restriction now, under the new Canada/US air treaty). QF does charter 744s out of LAX fairly regularly for day flights, mostly to cruise ship operators, interestingly enough (wonder if these are crewed by QF or dry-leased for the day?).

docbert

AA (and UA) already run 3-class aircraft LAX-JFK.

Whilst not the the caliber of a current International config, but they are certainly much better than the standard US domestic 2-class planes.

Supersonic Swinger

With their OW partner and soon-to-be joint business partner AA running 11 daily frequencies from LAX to JFK and EWR, it probably makes sense to rely on their lift rather than flying low load planes between the two. Much like EZE and BOM can be serviced via SCL and SIN by LAN and Kingfisher.

As for converting AKL-LAX to JQ, that's Alan Joyce's way of telling you to consider Air New Zealand and *A.

ByrdluvsAWACO

Why would AA put that many premium seats on a lower yield route when they could rake in a lot more money sending it to south america. AA is losing money as it is on the JFK-LAX transcons. They sure as heck won't be placing a 772 on that route. Not only that, AA doesn't have enough 772's to dedicate to transcons.

With the new narrow body order this week, the future of widebody planes on US transcons is up in the air.

number_6

The SAG (screen actors guild) contract with AA requires AA to provide a premium F service ... hence the 762 configuration with the only real F for US domestic service. While it may well switch to 738/A320, there will always be luxurious F seating LAX-JFK. My guess is old 763s will be rotated through (balancing cycles with flight time), and the J sleeper seats will be sold as F (but 2 class, so no J; I think the SAG contract doesn't require J, only F).