wandering_fred

Since UL code shares with both MH (KUL) and QF (SIN) on the CMB-SYD route, I will guess that eventually there will be a UL code on the SIN-PER segments as well.

I looked at some random week day fares CMB-SYD-CMB in July. The travel times with UL were better (and a lot shorter) than CX via HKG, but were modestly more expensive (roughly $AU60). No bets taken on fares the other direction.

Happy wandering

Fred

seat_4D

1) I understand it fully

2) you made constant "hub" references as a reason why there were no Intl flights out of PER in another thread, and in this one once the new flights were announced changed your tune entirely.

3) How exactly do you think I want QF to operate intl flights out of PER other than capture their share of significant demand on existing routes that until 2 years ago they serviced regularly (HKG, SIN and DPS in particular) while offering flight options to their significant number of FF members and growing general public of travellers? Not sure if you have ever noticed, but we don't all live in SYD or MEL in this country and it is not often (ever) convenient to route through these mystical "hubs" if travelling North or West

edy4eva

While I can't claim to know how QF and VA crew rostering fully works, I have gathered insights from chats with FAs. Typical work days sit at 6-9 hours, with the longer shifts given an extended midway break (not necessarily on the ground). Once a crew is rostered for 10+ hours, the following day is off. There's also a provision for early starts/late nights that calls for the next day/night off.

Dave Noble

If QF was making significant profits on those routes , do you really think that it would have dropped them just to spite Perth

There is no need to route through the east coast - there are plenty of airlines heading north from Perth

Platinum A332

+1 - QF are throwing a lot at the PER market despite the mining slowdown, for example;

- Pretty much 100% of all flights on the refurbished 332 will be for flights in and out of PER.
- Opening of a new Business Lounge to take place second half of this year (which may arguably be the best domestic lounge in Australia).
- Resumption of PER-SIN, Continuation of seasonal PER-AKL.
- In recognition of the fact that it does not operate many international flights ex-PER, passengers flying PER-HKG and PER-DOH earn much more status credits than say BNE-HKG or MEL-DOH.

Reality is, QF has invested a lot in PER and has paid significant attention to the PER market where it is profitable for them to do so.

seat_4D

1) Thanks to Virgin for introducing only the A330 to PER, Qantas have responded with the same. As this is the longest transcontinental flight wouldn't it make sense that most of the flights are using the new plane? Until VA made the play that QF followed the ex PER routes were regularly serviced by aged and redundant aircraft. Following your competitors initiative is hardly showing initiative.

2) It may be the best J lounge, it may also be not to the same standard as SYD or MEL, we will all have to wait and see. The DRW lounge is currently the best in Australia IMO, I can not see how Qantas can top that other than making it bigger which would not make much sense.

3) The resumption of SIN is more an acknowledgement of a flawed service removal decision

4) BNE - HKG Discount Y 30 credits, Y 40 credits, Premium Economy 60 or 70 credits (depending on standard or flex), J 120 or 135 credits (depending on standard or flex).

PER-HKG Discount Y 25 credits, full Y 50 credits, Premium Economy 50 Credits, J 100 credits.

Only a person buying a full economy ticket (which nobody does as it costs more than a Premium Economy ticket) earns more credits on CX than a person flying QF from BNE. Not only do they not earn "much more" credits, they earn 20% - 35% less credits.

Platinum A332

Apologies - what I meant to say was that those flying on partner airline routes out of PER earn more SC than passengers flying from the East Coast (CX vs. CX, QR vs. QR). Imo, this is an acknowledgment from QF that whilst it cannot viably offer a full range international services from PER, it does realise the importance of its FF base there.

seat_4D

Sure it my be an acknowledgement indeed. But a more appropriate acknowledgement, in the absence of choice, would be to offer the same SC's and points as they would on their metal, should their metal be available. After all it is not the choice of the, as you put it, important FF base in PER to not fly QF, that was the choice of the airline. And as SC's have no real cash cost to the carrier it would be a more appropriate "compensation" for their decision, IMO.

After all if I chose CX over QF out of say BNE then indeed I deserve a "penalty" of my earn rate. But I don't have that choice available in this instance.

og

Ahhh- I do think that SCs have a cash or quasi cash value. Take for example the cost to the airline for a visit to the J lounge compared to a visit to the Flounge. This assumes the traveller is getting lounge access by status rather than COS. The difference can be considerable.

seat_4D

Quasi cost I would pay, emotional cost to the PAX for certain. MTO food and a spa treatment aside though, the cost variance between J & F lounges would be incremental in most cases, not excessive.

DOM I know, but I am sitting in the SYD J lounge now. My intake so far has been:

1 x toasted ham and cheese sandwich, one shower, one use of WIFI, one Gin and Tonic and one Heineken.

As every single one of these items are also available in the QP, the only cost difference is a duplication in staff at front counter, and incremental increase of operating staff (as if there was only one lounge probably 1 of the 3 staff currently cleaning tables would still be needed).

Go CX Wing F vs J for example, and same deal. OK Moet is an extra $10 a bottle, that is only about $2 a glass.

grov

Dave, this is the second time you have introduced this straw man argument. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that any Sandgroper has ever made this assertion.

Globaliser

If you think that I have changed my tune, then plainly you have not understood what I have been consistently saying.

Flights like PER-SIN and PER-HKG are, for QF, flights from a place that is not a hub to another place that is not a hub.

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.

Where have I ever said anything different?

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.

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?

DownUnderFlyer

[mod hat] This thread is starting to derail and I had to delete personal attacks. So please stay on topic, stay friendly and no personal attacks. [/mod hat]

wandering_fred

Ignoring my personal feelings on PER-SIN, when the A330 refurbishments are done, the real question of supporting PER (under the new QF strategy) will be the absence or presence of a PER-DXB segment with QF metal.

PER-SIN and PER-HKG needs to have a reasonable number of QF flight numbers on the OW partner aircraft arriving/departing those airports. Alas I suspect that QF do not want to have codes (may be commercially prohibited in having ??) on the BA flights to LHR and the idea of QF codes on AA to DFW means likely reducing the uptake on QF via SYD. UL AY JL S7 flights don't enter the picture (though should) and CX won't code share.

End result - PER people fly other airlines.

Happy wandering unless you really do like QF FF status.

Fred

seat_4D

According to figures I have in a tourism report around 500,000 Western Australians visit Singapore as a holiday / business destination last year (1,370 per day).

A little over 400,000 visited Bali as a holiday destination last year (cant see too much business happening on Bintang Island). Virgin and Garuda offer a combined 12 flights a week with what you could call full cost aircraft (J class offering, meals, drinks and baggage included.

According to the ABS in relation to international travel "In the year ending June 2014, there was considerable variation in the rate of movement for short-term resident departures (the number of movements per 1,000 state or territory population) across the states and territories. Western Australia had the highest movement rate (549 movements per 1,000 population) followed by the Australian Capital Territory (451), the Northern Territory (441), New South Wales (404), Victoria (384), Queensland (328), "

Lets put that into perspective - WA have 3,870 people leaving the state for short term overseas travel every day.

In Queensland that number is just 4,215 people - 345 people per day more than WA or 2 x 73H flights.

Yet today QF will operate 9 international flights out of BNE servicing only incrementally higher population movements. And none out of PER.

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.

In fact if they ran a 73H directly against VA once a day to DPS I am sure it would prove a highly profitable and lucrative route, more lucrative than sending 9 half full 73H planes to KTA to service a dwindling iron ore market at any rate.