CXoneWorld From Australia, joined Aug 2004, 316 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 3919 times:
This is not a debate question!! But I do think that a lot of people share the impression with me that QF/CX seems to be one of the WEAKEST links within the oneworld alliance!! Apart from the FCO codeshare, and the very restricted reciprocal FFP regime, cooperation between the two airlines is almost non-existent, in my fair opinion.
Why is such happening? Given the relative proximity of the two airline's respective hubs (SYD and HKG), and the masive volume of traffic, both business and leisure, flying in-between, I would imagine there are heaps of codeshare/joint marketing or other cooperation opportunities between the two (such as CX codesharing on QF's SYD-OOL/CBR and QF codesharing on CX's HKG-TPE/KUL etc). Yes, I am aware that QF and CX are fierce competitors on the HKG-AUSTRALIA runs, but then isn't it the same situation that BA and CX face on HKG-LHR as well? At least relationship between BA and CX appear to be much more rosier to me with the great number of codeshare agreements in place between the two.
So why isn't this happening with QF and CX? I reckon their common foes are something like Singapore, Thai and no doubt Emirates, but not really each other....
Jupiter2 From Australia, joined Jan 2001, 915 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3753 times:
Historical competitors, fierce if not down right dirty at times !! There has been a lot of bad blood in the past between the two in particular when QF operated their HKG/BKK and HKG/SIN flights, the HKG/BKK segments convienently connected with the European services.
What are they going to be like when QF start direct HKG/LHR flights !!!
Bill142 From Australia, joined Aug 2004, 8466 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3716 times:
QF and CX are the only ones who fly the route and there is probably no need to co-operate appart from what that have to do for oneworld. Beyond HKG and SYD (and other AU ports) is a different story. Virgin might give them a bit of a shake up as they will most likey codeshare with Virgin Blue in Australia. Both may look at co-operating more, but I don't see it happening, but as usual it will be Big Dick who makes the competition look at what there doing.
Gemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5826 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3701 times:
"I know he said relative, but that's still pretty far... "
Not really, what's in between? MNL & BNE and lots & lots & lots of sweet f**k all and thats about it!
It's all a matter of attitude. Most Ozzies would consider HKG "relatively" close. NZ, New Cal & Fiji at 3-4 hours are all "close" and closer than PER or DRW!
This attitude differance shows up all the time, one example: during the last round of French necular test in the Pacific I heard one Frog govertment spokesman say words to the effect that "the testing was a long way from Oz", big mistake of course, most Ozzies regard PPT as next door!
CXoneWorld From Australia, joined Aug 2004, 316 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3548 times:
OK, let's put it this way, 9hour by no means sounds like a trip to a "nearby" destination, but the fact that Asia is the closest continent to Australasia makes SYD and HKG not so far away in a relative standing...
After all, I strongly believe that HKG and SYD is a very "workable" city pair for codeshare, etc.
Chinaeastern From China, joined Apr 2004, 348 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3524 times:
i would say SYD and HKG are pretty close.
QF probably need a better partner than CX in asia. i mean that look at the network of CX, they really need someone else to provide services within asia themselves.
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3510 times:
I would say CX are one of the weaker links in the Oneworld chain - although HKG is a huge Asian hub, for some reason the main Oneworld Asian connecting point is Singapore (home of a Star rival). CX do relatively few codeshares with other OW partners, have a pretty restrictive FFP earn 'n burn agreement with other OW partners, and generally are not pulling their weight. I know that system incompatibilities have made codeshare as well as frequent flyer recognition, redemption and upgrade processing a real pain.
Trolley Dolley From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3445 times:
Apart from historic bad blood between CX and QF, maybe it's because of the relationship between BA and QF? The Joint Services Agreement on the Australia/UK/Europe routes is designed to consolidate flights. If QF was seen to be getting to close to CX, it might put renewal of the JSA in jeopardy.
Regards the FFP agreements, I don't think it is a case of CX not pulling its weight and putting restrictions on earning'n'burning. It's the carrier you are flying on that dictates terms for earning miles, not the carrier who is hosting the FFP. Recently there have been huge cut backs on earning points on BA, AA and EI in the QF FFP, and I see CX's programme has been adjusted for the worse as well.
Australia to HKG has multiple flights from 5 cities in Australia. LON to HKG only has flights between those two cities. The Australian operation is much larger portion of revenues and operations for CX and QF than the comparative flights for CX and BA between LON and HKG.
Personally I think CX is the star of oneworld as I've found their service to be consistently superior to the others in the group. I base this claim on the miles & flights I've done to keep me at gold QFF level for the past 5 years. A QF insider confided that they are afraid of CX's service levels and really don't want their passengers on the green tails as it makes the red tails look below par.
CXoneworld From Australia, joined Aug 2004, 316 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3287 times:
although HKG is a huge Asian hub, for some reason the main Oneworld Asian connecting point is Singapore (home of a Star rival). CX do relatively few codeshares with other OW partners, have a pretty restrictive FFP earn 'n burn agreement with other OW partners, and generally are not pulling their weight.
HKG is a big oneworld city! The alliance had even issued a press statement before to celebrate its strong Hong Kong presence!!
I am aware that CX has not been very active in OW in the past, but this is changing... At the moment, it already has some pretty comprehensive codeshares with AA, BA, IB and the would-be-OW-candidate JL.
So it just gets me thinking why not QF? (other than the single and only FCO agreement)
Cx123 From Australia, joined May 2004, 695 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (10 years 4 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3118 times:
" would say CX are one of the weaker links in the Oneworld chain - although HKG is a huge Asian hub, for some reason the main Oneworld Asian connecting point is Singapore (home of a Star rival). CX do relatively few codeshares with other OW partners, have a pretty restrictive FFP earn 'n burn agreement with other OW partners, and generally are not pulling their weight. I know that system incompatibilities have made codeshare as well as frequent flyer recognition, redemption and upgrade processing a real pain"
How is CX the weakest link? Without CX I dare say Oneworld will be in the shi7s! However without IB orAY Oneworld can still operate.
Also why should CX and QF cooperate more and bring down the whole standard of CX?
There is a difference between service and product offering between the 2.
CX FFP is not TOO bad also it is QF that is being restrictive! (eg. no upgrade using points on other airlines!)
CXCPA From Hong Kong, joined May 2000, 387 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 4 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3091 times:
History is not the problem. In business, money is the most important. If CX can make money from QF and vice versa, they will co-operate. For example, if CX can make more money with Star Alliance partner, I am sure that CX withdraw Oneworld immediately and join Star Alliance.
So the only and reasonable explanation is money.
Blink182 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 5485 posts, RR: 15
Reply 16, posted (10 years 4 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3013 times:
Here's an idea- why doesn't QF pull up its service standards on it's Australia-Asia-Europe routes and attempt to make theirs identical with CX. The two airlines could even attempt to time their own flights at different times to offer a wider choice to the traveler. When two airlines operate a route and codeshare with each other, they tend to time each other's flights so that they leave at different times in order to offer a wider choice and to avoid competition.
I am sure it is much more complicated than this, but its a start.
Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
TBCITDG From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 921 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (10 years 4 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2937 times:
There is noooo way that anyone can compare the service standards on CX. By far (and constantly) their service levels have far exceeded that of QF. It is only now that QF have finally started to invest in upgrading their product, that it will bridge the gap a little closer.
CX standards are not only high on board, but also on the ground.
Cathay250 From Hong Kong, joined Aug 1999, 221 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (10 years 4 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2922 times:
I think it's a bit limited choice for co-operating by timing each other's flight time. Take HKG-AUSSIE route as an example, the golden time for these route will be departing at night and arriving in the morning, any flight that departing before the night time in HK would result in either arriving in the Mid-night in Melbourne and not even possible in Sydney. And there is no point to spend a day time on plane while u can actually sleep over on the plane and get a full day after arrival
CXoneWorld From Australia, joined Aug 2004, 316 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (10 years 4 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2831 times:
Does the matter have anything to do with "perceived" or "actual" quality gap between CX and QF?
I don't necessarily think so.
QF is a decent airline and it has been catching up massively with the latest product upgrade. After all, if CX regards services on AA as good enough for it to do codeshare with, I can't see why not QF...
Could somebody pls enlighten me on the issue, please!!
MEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4358 posts, RR: 35
Reply 20, posted (10 years 4 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2814 times:
Come on, CX's Y-service is nothing special, actually the seat arrangement is more cramped than on any other long haul airline I have flown and the meal portians are quite small. The IFE is ok but nothing extraordinary. I think all in all absolutely on par with QF.
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
Marara From Australia, joined Oct 2001, 678 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (10 years 4 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2743 times:
Im pretty sure there is another reason for the lack of co-operation. Govt Approval, QF and CX were the dominant carriers on the route while AN was around, and now with AN gone i cant see the ACCC allowing any co-operation (look an QF/NZ and there are a heap of other airlines operating).
QF and CX have been working together in the background, apparently CX assisted QF with the intoduction of the 330. But you can still see the hint of bad blood between the two, im sure cathay isnt please about QF being allowed on the HKG-LHR run while being locked out of the SYD-LAX market.
I like work: it fascinates me. I can sit and look at it for hours. Jerome K Jerome
PA110 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2017 posts, RR: 23
Reply 22, posted (10 years 4 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2648 times:
The QF/CX relationship is pretty much indicative of the entire OneWorld alliance. Unlike Star which has put a huge amount of effort in commonality and reciprocity amongst member carriers, the same cannot be said of OneWorld. The OneWorld alliance is dysfunctional at best, especially when it comes to frequent flyer issues.
Carriers of the Star Alliance (with very few exceptions) all earn equal miles on all carriers. If you are already a member of your home airline's plan, there is no need (or advantage) to joining a partner member's plan as well. Not so within OneWorld. U.S. passengers who are members of AA's AAdvantage plan do not get miles flying BA transatlantic, and only get 25% of the flown miles beyond London on BA (when flying any discounted Economy Class fare).
Compare the following:
AA AAdvantage member flying BA SFO-LON-JNB: will receive 1410 miles.
UA MileagePlus member flying LH SFO-FRA-JNB: will receive 11085 miles.
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8481 posts, RR: 9
Reply 25, posted (10 years 4 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2538 times:
I've done a lot of flying on QF and it is slowly improving. I have never had a problem with FAs or ground staff, but the mid management is horrid - probably a bunch of left overs from the years of government ownership. A short time ago their domestic food was pure slop, but that has improved significantly. Their 737s had transvestite seats in business (coach seats that liked to dress up as business seats) but there is some hope.
Comparing QF to CX is difficult in some ways. CX is a better airline for the average passenger and takes very good care of oneworld pax - they send me to the First Class lounge even when I'm flying cattle car. Their planes have for years looked fresher on the inside and their FAs are always nice. Most QF FAs are equally nice when you take the time to talk to them, but there have been a few with PMS or SRH (sperm retention headache).