Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Singapore Says Close To Australia Open Skies Deal  
User currently offlinePhilsquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3811 times:

http://yahoo.reuters.com/financeQuoteCompanyNewsArticle.jhtml?duid=mtfh56990_2005-01-24_08-38-24_sin5387_newsml

Interesting read. Looks like things are about to get interesting.

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCol From Malaysia, joined Nov 2003, 2123 posts, RR: 22
Reply 1, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3683 times:

Philsquares,

Me thinks more 380's!!!


User currently offlineCyclonic From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 231 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3630 times:

If it goes through, watch the stink coming from QF! I don't think it'll happen, Mr Dixon would rather chew his arm off than allow SQ to fly ex-SYD, but if the government here can be blinded with enough numbers.......


Keith Richards: The man that Death forgot...
User currently offlineUA744KSFO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3602 times:

The article above, while very encouraging, still quotes only a Singaporean government official. I'll believe that a deal is close when I hear a similar statement from an Australian government official since it is Australia that is resisting such a deal due to pressure from Dixon and Company.

User currently offlineMaddy From Germany, joined Aug 2004, 164 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3531 times:

Does Singapore have any other "Open Skies" deals?

User currently offlineBill142 From Australia, joined Aug 2004, 8460 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3341 times:

Does Singapore have any other "Open Skies" deals?

I believe they have an open skies agreement with the US. Having one with Australia would allow them to take advantage of the existing one with the US further.

While I would like to see more competition on the US-OZ route it shouldn't be at the expense of Australian jobs. Perhaps some form of conditions regarding what labour can be used Ie 75% of all fa's must be Australian.


User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20751 posts, RR: 62
Reply 6, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3329 times:

Does Singapore have any other "Open Skies" deals?

::chuckle::

The answer is the last two sentences of the linked article:

Singapore has open skies pacts with the United States, New Zealand, Brunei, Chile, Peru and the United Arab Emirates. It is also in talks with India and China to liberalise air travel between Singapore and those countries.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12224 posts, RR: 18
Reply 7, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3279 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Im hoping that the deal is allowed, and im looking forward to the stink bomb QF gives. QF needs to accept competition on its money making routes. Go SQ

User currently offlineChrisrad From Australia, joined Dec 2000, 1071 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3276 times:

What about the possiblitly of MEL-LAX instead, not as much competition there like SYD?


Welcome aboard Malaysia Airlines! Winner of Best Cabin Staff 2001,2002,2003,2004,2007,2009,2012
User currently offlineTBCITDG From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 921 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3253 times:

As UA744 says, the statement has only been made by a government official. I would wait before getting too excited on any open sky agreements. It would be very different if Anderson came out and said something in favor of both countries getting closer. Then QF should be very worried!


User currently offlineDocpepz From Singapore, joined May 2001, 1971 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3232 times:

Taken from ABC News Online:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200501/s1285216.htm

Last Update: Thursday, January 20, 2005. 7:00am (AEDT)
Singapore Airlines close to trans-Pacific access
Federal Transport Minister John Anderson says the Government is likely to open the lucrative trans-Pacific route to Singapore Airlines

Qantas currently controls the route which connects Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane with Los Angeles.

For years Singapore Airlines has wanted to enter the market and next month members of the Singapore Government will meet Australian officials to push the case.

Mr Anderson told the ABC's 7:30 Report it is not unreasonable that a decision could be made within six months.

"It would be my view that Cabinet would be of a mind to look seriously at some access," Mr Anderson said.

Qantas is desperate to keep Singapore Airlines off the route.

Qantas boss Geoff Dixon says there is a long way to go before there are any changes.

"There's a lot of things before that probably happens, but obviously the minister knows more about what cabinet might do than I would," he said.
=======================================

Further, The Air Asia Chief, Tony Fernandes at an Asia-Pacific travel conference yesterday hit SIA for double standards about wanting to fly Australia-USA and said he was "250% with Geoff on this issue".

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Business/Singapore-Airlines-hit-for-double-standards/2005/01/24/1106415527616.html?oneclick=true

He claimed that Singapore had blocked his Airline from getting more passengers from Singapore to the Malaysian border town of Johor Bahru to fly them out from the airport, thus not giving him a level playing field.

I found his comments rather baffling since it is the Singapore govt and not SIA that decides such things.

Further, the Singapore govt's investment arm Temasek Holdings invested minority stakes in 2 airlines operating out of Changi, putting them in direct competition with SIA and allowed a third private airline, Valuair, to operate from Changi also in competition with SIA.

Also, I wonder why Fernandes says he is 250% with Geoff when Geoff started Jetstar Asia based in Singapore to compete directly with Tony Fernandes' Air Asia! A case of my enemy's enemy is my friend?

Off the record, Singapore-Perth return fares are now at a record low of $288 Singapore dollars (or $240 Australian dollars) on SIA, valid for booking till March 31st. All in response to immense competition ex Changi. If the govt wanted to protect SIA and their yields, they could ban Valuair, Tiger Airways, jetstar asia and Air Asia from flying out of Singapore, just as Dubai Airport prevented the entry of LCCs to compete with EK.








User currently offlinePhilsquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3179 times:

Well, it looks like we now have a quote from a "government official".

User currently offlineBBADXB From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3005 times:


Is it true that there isn't a single aussie/kiwi f/a @ Singapore Airlines?

Somebody told me that SQ has a "strictly asian only" flight attendant policy.


User currently offlinePhilsquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2971 times:

Don't know about the "strictly asian only" flight attendant policy, but there are a great number of Oz/Kiwi pilots, both Captains and F/Os at SQ. No cabin staff though.

User currently offlineAnstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5280 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2948 times:

Why should they have a majority Australian crew?

Enough stink was made when QF wanted to base F/A's in the UK.
Australian's can't have it their way all the time.



User currently offlineQantas077 From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 5861 posts, RR: 39
Reply 15, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2925 times:

Docpez,
those fares you quoted are all well and good but none of them are available EX perth to Singapore, i'd hardly call 3 airlines flying the SIN-PER route competition. the cheapest PER-SIN for feb was well over $800.

"Yeo said he would discuss the open skies pact with his Australian counterpart John Anderson in mid-February".

how can they almost be there if they've not discussed it with our transport minister??

but anyways, bring it on, i'll gladly fly SQ to LA if the price is right, QF has been milking us for way to long on this route, good competition from SQ will be a bonus for us travellers.



a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.
User currently offlineAtltraveler From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 44 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2909 times:

Have never flown QF but flew UA from LAX to SYD last year and their product could use major improvement as well. Maybe this competition will make them get off their behinds.

User currently offlineAntares From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 1402 posts, RR: 39
Reply 17, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2822 times:

Lots of rumours reaching me that Virgin Blue will announce its transpac long haul operation very soon as it tries to get capacity allocation as an Australian flag carrier before SQ carves out a slice.

'Friendly' tension no doubt exists yet again between SQ and the Virgin Group as 49% owner of VS, while Richard Branson's family company has its own 24% of Virgin Blue (DJ).

Wonder how long before Dixon starts to bleat about the behemoth again, a term he used when he accused SQ, Branson and NZ of ganging up on poor old Qantas when the Singaporeans foolishly and expensively failed to gain 49% of Air New Zealand/Ansett in 2001.

There are so many varying accounts of just how the long haul Virgin Blue will be constituted, and whether or not SQ will relent and allow the term Virgin to be applied to it, or insist on a cop out like Pacific Blue for the NZ subsidiary, that it would be hard to guess what it will be like, what it will fly or how it will be owned, other than being at least 51% Australian owned as required under the US-Australia air traffic agreement.

Antares


User currently offlineIrishpower From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 386 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (9 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2811 times:

I would think UA would be mad as well. SQ could give them a run not only on SYD-LAX but SYD-SFO as well (UA is the only carrier flying SYD-SFO).



Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Britain Says NO To UK-US Open Skies Deal posted Tue Oct 23 2001 02:25:22 by Jiml1126
EU To Negotiate Single US Open Skies Deal posted Thu Jun 12 2003 18:00:42 by United01
Who Wants To Fly To Ireland/open Skies posted Thu Dec 29 2005 22:50:39 by SNNUS
EU-USA Open Skies Deal LHR Question posted Mon Dec 19 2005 23:15:37 by MarkATL
Canada, U.S. Agree On New Open Skies Deal posted Mon Nov 14 2005 23:52:42 by Vio
India Proposes South Asian Open Skies Deal posted Sat Nov 12 2005 16:52:19 by Zarniwoop
India Approves New US Open Skies Deal posted Wed Apr 13 2005 23:23:29 by YUL332LX
Lebanon And EU To Finalize Open Skies Policy posted Mon Nov 8 2004 23:44:57 by BA
US Seeks Open Skies Deal With Canada posted Sun Jan 25 2004 21:47:36 by CanadaEH
Lebanon And Bahrain Sign Open Skies Deal posted Wed Jan 14 2004 17:34:14 by AF022