HKG-route moves to CPH
Jun 14, 2018, 6:09 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: CPH
Programs: SK-EBD
Posts: 1,273
HKG-route moves to CPH
From W19 the HKG-route will move from ARN til CPH.
The CPH-HKG schedule looks overall better than ARN-HKG. It will be five times weekly.
SK 965 CPH-HKG ..34567 20:55 14:45+1
SK 966 HKG-CPH .2..567 01:20 06:20
SK 966 HKG-CPH 1……01:35 06:35
Edit: W19 may be imprecise. First CPH departure will be 28-okt-18.
The CPH-HKG schedule looks overall better than ARN-HKG. It will be five times weekly.
SK 965 CPH-HKG ..34567 20:55 14:45+1
SK 966 HKG-CPH .2..567 01:20 06:20
SK 966 HKG-CPH 1……01:35 06:35
Edit: W19 may be imprecise. First CPH departure will be 28-okt-18.
Last edited by Tango Alpha; Jun 14, 2018 at 6:20 am
Jun 14, 2018, 6:57 am
#2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Gold (*G), Marriott Titanium (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 21,166
Interesting move. The reason can't really be ARN not being able to accommodate the changed departure and arrival times.
Are they worried about Cathay flying to Copenhagen this summer? Or just the route not working well out of Arlanda?
Are they worried about Cathay flying to Copenhagen this summer? Or just the route not working well out of Arlanda?
Jun 14, 2018, 7:37 am
#4
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: CPH
Programs: SK Diamond (*G), HH Gold
Posts: 580
The newly imposed Swedish tax on air travel might also play a role here.
Interesting that they keep the a/c on the ground that long but good timing for business travel. They must be confident about a very high yield to justify this.
Interesting that they keep the a/c on the ground that long but good timing for business travel. They must be confident about a very high yield to justify this.
Jun 14, 2018, 7:50 am
#5
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,044
Well, the ticket prices of Stockholm-Hong Kong R/T (at least in cheap SAS Go) were sometimes very cheap.
So, I dare to say, it was more about the profitability than the new Swedish tax itself.
The ticket price of Copenhagen-somewhere R/T is often more expensive than the ticket price of Stockholm-somewhere R/T.
So it hopefully increase profitability of Copenhagen-Hong Kong route than Stockholm-Hong Kong route.
So, I dare to say, it was more about the profitability than the new Swedish tax itself.
The ticket price of Copenhagen-somewhere R/T is often more expensive than the ticket price of Stockholm-somewhere R/T.
So it hopefully increase profitability of Copenhagen-Hong Kong route than Stockholm-Hong Kong route.
Jun 14, 2018, 9:07 am
#6
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: AGH
Posts: 5,979
I guess it is easier to get customers from UK and Germany... I know a lot of German people on their way to China who happily connect through CPH but do not want to go all the way up to Stockholm and then rather go to FRA, MUC or ZRH.
Jun 14, 2018, 10:14 am
#8
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denmark
Programs: TK Elite
Posts: 11,848
For Germans connecting through ARN rather than CPH shouldn't make much difference. The flight to ARN is a bit longer but ARN-China is shorter.
As a Dane, this is very good news. Also the revised depart. times are great (to compete directly with the CX flight, however, CX departs CPH in the early afternoon)- Let us hope the very competitive SK HKG fares will still be available from CPH.
As a Dane, this is very good news. Also the revised depart. times are great (to compete directly with the CX flight, however, CX departs CPH in the early afternoon)- Let us hope the very competitive SK HKG fares will still be available from CPH.
Jun 14, 2018, 11:14 am
#10
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: AGH
Posts: 5,979
Jun 14, 2018, 3:41 pm
#12
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: CPH
Programs: SK-EBD
Posts: 1,273
I'm too is puzzled by the 10 hour layover. Wasn’t that one of the factors that killed the BKK-SIN-route?A couple of hours earlier departure ex CPH and the plane could have returned the same day (much like PEK). There must be restraints, I can’t see.And how about the AY counterstrike on Asia? AFAIR ARN-HKG was labeled as such – and remained the only one.
Jun 14, 2018, 4:00 pm
#13
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Gold (*G), Marriott Titanium (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 21,166
For Germans connecting through ARN rather than CPH shouldn't make much difference. The flight to ARN is a bit longer but ARN-China is shorter.
As a Dane, this is very good news. Also the revised depart. times are great (to compete directly with the CX flight, however, CX departs CPH in the early afternoon)- Let us hope the very competitive SK HKG fares will still be available from CPH.
As a Dane, this is very good news. Also the revised depart. times are great (to compete directly with the CX flight, however, CX departs CPH in the early afternoon)- Let us hope the very competitive SK HKG fares will still be available from CPH.
Jun 14, 2018, 4:05 pm
#14
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tokyo
Programs: JAL Metal Card (OWE), SAS Eurobonus Gold (*G), Marriott Titanium (LTP), Tokyu Hotels Platinum
Posts: 21,166
I'm too is puzzled by the 10 hour layover. Wasn’t that one of the factors that killed the BKK-SIN-route?A couple of hours earlier departure ex CPH and the plane could have returned the same day (much like PEK). There must be restraints, I can’t see.And how about the AY counterstrike on Asia? AFAIR ARN-HKG was labeled as such – and remained the only one.
I assume they did the math. But sometimes that is not always the case even in fairly big companies.
Jun 14, 2018, 4:46 pm
#15
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,044
True, but don't underestimate the perceived distance... people do not calculate the right way. For them the way to China is loooooooong, either way. Copenhagen or FRA are closer to HAJ/HAM than ARN, so the trip is shorter... Makes no sense, but I have heard that sooo many times.
Great Circle Mapper
I think Singapore was killed as the tag on was too expensive to operate, and in the second part Bangkok offered to weak yield. Part of that equation was also the extra costs of parking the plane about the same number of hours as now in Hong Kong.
I assume they did the math. But sometimes that is not always the case even in fairly big companies.
I assume they did the math. But sometimes that is not always the case even in fairly big companies.
They also park their aircraft on Hong Kong, rather than flying to other destination during the 8-10 hours layover time in Hong Kong.