|
Originally Posted by Globaliser
(Post 24747235)
That was a good idea, unfortunately spoiled by another attempt by you to have the last word.
But everyone can read what you have written and what I have written, and they can try to make some sense out of the arguments advanced by you that contain clear factual errors which you have not even had the grace to acknowledge when they have been pointed out to you.You have already seen above, using hard data, how few international flights QF operates from BNE despite the fact that all airlines find BNE more attractive than PER (as demonstrated by the higher overall figures for flights and seats): QF has only 5 out of 38 tomorrow. |
Originally Posted by Globaliser
(Post 24702470)
Are you able to give any example of long-haul network airlines which successfully operate many high capacity flights on routes where neither end is at one of that airline's hubs?
Originally Posted by Globaliser
(Post 24707393)
That is why they will struggle against airlines for which the same route is a flight to/from a hub. So when SQ operates PER-SIN, that is a flight from a place that is not a hub to a place that is a hub. Ditto, if CX operates PER-HKG, that is a flight from a place that is not a hub to a place that is a hub.
Originally Posted by Globaliser
(Post 24707393)
And while we're at it, are there any other network airlines anywhere in the world that operate lots of international flights between a point that is not a hub to another point that is not a hub?
From my perspective I'm not looking for QF to operate "lots of international flights" out of PER, but surely they can do better than what they do now.
Originally Posted by Globaliser
(Post 24707393)
Things could be different for QF at PER if it chose to make PER a hub. But PER does not naturally lend itself to being a hub, for physical, geographical and economic reasons.
Originally Posted by Dave Noble
(Post 24706109)
If QF was making significant profits on those routes , do you really think that it would have dropped them just to spite Perth.
Originally Posted by seat_4D
(Post 24711984)
The only thing stopping Qantas operating profitable international services out of PER is the airline itself. The market and demand is clear, and as Fred rightly says PER people have stopped flying, they have just stopped flying Qantas.
Originally Posted by seat_4D
(Post 24731600)
The point is not that there should not be flights out of BNE (though it makes a mockery of the whole "hub" debate) the point is that there is a significant un catered demand out of PER to international destinations being forgone by QF. This reintroduction of SIN is a good backflip and if they have half a brain they will look critically at other routes that they have abandoned as well.
|
Originally Posted by danger
(Post 24875020)
What about EK's numerous Australia-New Zealand flights, and their JFK-MXP among others? And doesn't UA operate plenty of flights between non-hubs?
But thanks for your support, good to know that more people than Fred and I can see the flaws in the abandonment "strategy" |
Originally Posted by danger
(Post 24875020)
What about EK's numerous Australia-New Zealand flights, and their JFK-MXP among others? And doesn't UA operate plenty of flights between non-hubs?
Originally Posted by seat_4D
(Post 24875243)
You are reopening old wounds here - don't question the hub, or it stops being a hub and becomes "point to point" servicing a hub".....:confused:
EK's flights to/from Australia and New Zealand all start at DXB and all end at DXB. MXP-JFK also starts at DXB. I'll be corrected if I'm wrong, but I believe that DXB is an EK hub.
Originally Posted by danger
(Post 24875020)
I actually think PER is situated very well from a geographical and economic perspective. It's a stone's throw from Asia (Bali is closer than Canberra) and on the same or very similar time zone for much of it and it's obviously closer to Africa, the Middle East and Europe. In fact, without doing the sums I would think that of all the international destinations QF flies to PER would be closer to most of them than SYD or MEL. Where I do acknowledge it falls down is population but, again, surely QF could do better than what it's doing now.
|
Originally Posted by danger
(Post 24875020)
And doesn't UA operate plenty of flights between non-hubs?
|
Originally Posted by Globaliser
(Post 24875781)
"Point to point" flights are the opposite of flights "servicing a hub". If the flight operates to/from a hub, it's not a point-to-point flight. But I think you are just being deliberately obtuse about this.
EK's flights to/from Australia and New Zealand all start at DXB and all end at DXB. MXP-JFK also starts at DXB. I'll be corrected if I'm wrong, but I believe that DXB is an EK hub.And that's very possibly a fatal flaw. Good hubs are not only good connecting points, but typically have a lot of high-yielding O&D as well. The more you argue it, the less water your position holds. Remember in your opinion there were only hubs, not points. No QF flight to or from PER because it was not a HUB. Until PER-SIN was re-added, then it became points. On pointing out only Oz needs 3 "hubs" when RSA, HKG, SIN, Malaysia, Dubai etc etc etc manage with one you trot out a hollow city state argument, but you ignore RSA because it does not suit your point. This topic has been done to death, your position is as flawed as Qantas logic as evidenced by both you and the airline changing your opinion at your own convenience. As I said, opening old wounds. |
[mod hat] I am wondering whether this thread is going anywhere? Or anywhere good for this matter. Please try to stay relevant and on topic. [/mod hat]
|
Originally Posted by seat_4D
(Post 24881232)
Ok, so EK's international flights all start from and end in Dubai, and Qantas' international flights all start and end in........ Australia. PER being a city of Australia, like all the other "hubs" or "points" or whatever your next terminology may be (my guess is "rim" as it circles both hub and spoke, but who can tell until you tell us all we are wrong right??).
The more you argue it, the less water your position holds. Remember in your opinion there were only hubs, not points. No QF flight to or from PER because it was not a HUB. Until PER-SIN was re-added, then it became points. On pointing out only Oz needs 3 "hubs" when RSA, HKG, SIN, Malaysia, Dubai etc etc etc manage with one you trot out a hollow city state argument, but you ignore RSA because it does not suit your point. This topic has been done to death, your position is as flawed as Qantas logic as evidenced by both you and the airline changing your opinion at your own convenience. As I said, opening old wounds. The economics of airline operations dictates that you get as many bums on seats as possible. The best way of doing this, as far as ihternational travel goes, is with the hub and spoke method. Taking your preferred option for multiple flights out of Perth, how about we extend this, and make it multiple flights out of Karratha/Broome/Port Hedland? Maybe even further, multiple flights per day out of Meekatharra? The reality is that not all ports can support direct services (Where is the twice daily Meekatharra - Denpasar service?) Perth just happens to be one of those ports which cannot support a multitude of services. Dave |
Originally Posted by seat_4D
(Post 24881232)
Ok, so EK's international flights all start from and end in Dubai, and Qantas' international flights all start and end in........ Australia. PER being a city of Australia, like all the other "hubs" or "points" or whatever your next terminology may be (my guess is "rim" as it circles both hub and spoke, but who can tell until you tell us all we are wrong right??).
Now, you brought up about QF hubbing through Australia, Let;s look a bit further, BA only huns through London (Would you be happy with the BA model? As it stands, QF has a couple of hubs, SYD, Mel (a minor hub) and BNE. If you want to fly QF from somewhere to somewhere else, then you hub through those ports. If you don't want to hub, then you fly someone else I really am at a loss - as a QF shareholder - to find why you are getting so worked up about thid. either the route workd for you or it doesn.t Dave |
Originally Posted by seat_4D
(Post 24881232)
Ok, so EK's international flights all start from and end in Dubai, and Qantas' international flights all start and end in........ Australia. PER being a city of Australia, like all the other "hubs" or "points" or whatever your next terminology may be (my guess is "rim" as it circles both hub and spoke, but who can tell until you tell us all we are wrong right??).
In contrast, "Australia" is vast country which (according to some) qualifies as a continent in its own right. "Australia" is not a city state and "Australia" is not an airport. It's therefore nonsense to suggest that any QF international flight from PER is comparable to any EK flight from DXB. PER is not a hub, and QF shows no signs of changing its position on that.
Originally Posted by seat_4D
(Post 24881232)
Remember in your opinion there were only hubs, not points. No QF flight to or from PER because it was not a HUB. Until PER-SIN was re-added, then it became points.
What I have repeatedly and consistently said is that if a network airline operates an international flight that doesn't have a hub at one end, that flight will struggle. That's the consistent experience of network airlines all around the world. I've given you examples already (all of which you've conveniently ignored). It's why BA is so often accused of having become London Airways. It's why UA operates NCL-EWR, but BA doesn't. It's why AA operates EDI-JFK, but BA doesn't. It's why AA operates EDI-JFK, but UA operates EDI-EWR. For each of the airlines operating those routes, there's a hub at one end. For BA, it would be a point-to-point flight which would struggle.
Originally Posted by seat_4D
(Post 24881232)
On pointing out only Oz needs 3 "hubs" when RSA, HKG, SIN, Malaysia, Dubai etc etc etc manage with one you trot out a hollow city state argument, but you ignore RSA because it does not suit your point.
And accusations of illogicality are a bit rich coming from someone who couldn't even count properly, let alone distinguish between QF flights and QF codeshare flights. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:34 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.