N471WN From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2318 times:
Qantas continues to miss the mark on where to expand. I was at LAX on Friday and saw 4 747's all parked together. And yet Qantas has no flights to or from SFO having abandoned the airport years ago. The result is high United fares and load factors and no competition to "down under". United thanks you Qantas for your stupidity in thinking that we San Francisco Bay Area people will first fly to LAX on another airline to take your airline........
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 12209 posts, RR: 62
Reply 4, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2176 times:
Quoting Dbba (Reply 1): And yet Qantas has no flights to or from SFO having abandoned the airport years ago. The result is high United fares and load factors and no competition to "down under".
If QF thought SFO was such a money-maker, wouldn't they fly there? Perhaps their revenue management and financial analysis teams have determined that it is more cost effective and network efficient to just deposit all US-bound customers at LAX with AA, and maybe QF feels it can still capture an acceptable level of SFO-Australia traffic with connections over LAX.
Quoting PapaNovember (Reply 3): Doesn't QANTAS get it's domestic feed from AA at LAX, Whereas UA feeds it's own Australian service through San Francisco?
Correct. QF hubs at LAX and distributes all of there thousands of weekly Australia-US customers at LAX T4 for onward flights to just about every major US business center nonstop on AA, plus some smaller feed to the Pacific Northwest and YVR on AS.
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8567 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2045 times:
It's good to see PER getting more domestic flights. I lived there for 8 years and it is a fantastic city, even if it is a bit isolated. I would hope that QF schedules the flights in order to increase the international flights also.
ExFATboy From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2974 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1750 times:
Quoting 777ER (Reply 9): QF could easily feed passengers onto other Oneworld members
It's easier and more cost-effective to concentrate the feed through LAX. There's enough O&D (and some connection potential as well) at JFK to justify having their own metal go there, too.
The fact that both NZ and UA fly profitability into SFO is actually a very good reason for QF to avoid SFO...why get into a shooting war with the two Star carriers when you've already got all the feed you need at LAX?
If QF wants to expand service to North America, they have plenty of other opportunities (fly to YVR, or have their own metal go on to ORD, for example.)
Quoting Dbba (Reply 1): Qantas continues to miss the mark on where to expand.
It isn't an "either-or" choice for QF...they can choose to expand domestically and look for new international opportunities at the same time.
AS739X From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6239 posts, RR: 24
Reply 13, posted (9 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1724 times:
Dbba: We have to speak outside the fact that we would die to see Qantas roll up at SFO. It would look great to us, but not for thier numbers. The only QF we will ever see is that silver MD80 headed down to LAX. Maybe one day there will be the demand. The only chance I ever see QF coming back to SFO is if Singapore is allowed to fly OZ-USA routes. Possibly then QF may want to start a fight, but till then we get to see all the Qantas's 747's we want, when our planes land at LAX.
"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"