Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Australia To Decide On SQ LAX-SYD Next Week  
User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24325 posts, RR: 47
Posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 7295 times:

The Australian Federal Cabinet is due to decide next Tuesday if Singapore Airlines will be granted rights to enter the Australia-US market breaking up the duopoly currently enjoyed by Qantas and United.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/Business/...oute/2005/06/08/1118123898035.html

[Edited 2005-06-09 07:39:14]


From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
71 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTG992 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2001, 2910 posts, RR: 10
Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7268 times:

Mr Gregg said the report failed to take into consideration the large numbers of passengers who flew between the US and Australia each year through stopovers such as Auckland and Tokyo.


Very important point - we (NZ) carry a LARGE amount of Australia-US traffic.



-
User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11850 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7247 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Hope SQ is allowed on the route. QF would cry thou that its unfair having SQ on the route. More airlines means more competition means lower airfares and means more passengers on the route.

User currently offlineAerohottie From Australia, joined Mar 2004, 792 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7219 times:

Since when has SQ been a cost leader, and been interested in lower fares as opposed to trying their best to lift yields?
SQ just want a piece of a very tasty pie... they have no interest in changing the flavour of it at all.



What?
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7204 times:

Quoting Aerohottie (Reply 3):
Since when has SQ been a cost leader, and been interested in lower fares as opposed to trying their best to lift yields?

Isn't lowering higher priced fares on this route just what this sentence of the report meant?

"Singapore Airlines said it would make a heavy dent on business fares if it entered the Los Angeles route."

It appears they've already made their intentions clear, unless I'm reading it incorrectly.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineTBCITDG From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 921 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7195 times:

Speaking of duopoly, why does the Australian government permit the duopoly between SAA and QF between Australia and South Africa? Both these carriers can pretty much charge whatever they want between the tow countries.
Wouldn't it be nice if the government granted SQ "some" rights between OZ and the US so long as they break the other duopoly taking place?


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7183 times:

Quoting TBCITDG (Reply 5):
Speaking of duopoly, why does the Australian government permit the duopoly between SAA and QF between Australia and South Africa? Both these carriers can pretty much charge whatever they want between the tow countries.
Wouldn't it be nice if the government granted SQ "some" rights between OZ and the US so long as they break the other duopoly taking place?

What would really be nice is if all countries would allow all airlines to operate everywhere without any barriers. Then we would all enjoy great service and low fares everywhere.


User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7158 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 6):
Then we would all enjoy great service and low fares everywhere.

With the American experiment with deregulation beginning in 1978, and the EU following suit some 20 years later, I think we've seen exactly the opposite. Full deregulation leads to common denominator service levels dictated by price competition.

[Edited 2005-06-09 08:53:41]


International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineAerohottie From Australia, joined Mar 2004, 792 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7150 times:

Regardless of what SQ have stated publically. I have no doubt they have no intention of lowering fares, other than a nice introductory fare.
SQ are interested in having a slice of the traffic, not interested in being the market leader on this route.



What?
User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 7132 times:

Quoting Aerohottie (Reply 8):
Regardless of what SQ have stated publically. I have no doubt they have no intention of lowering fares, other than a nice introductory fare.
SQ are interested in having a slice of the traffic, not interested in being the market leader on this route.

What is wrong with that. Look at the disparity of service on the route now. UA and QF are not equal, but both charge the same fares. I venture to say if SQ is allowed on the route, both them and QF would do just fine. However, I think UA would be the one left holding the bag. Their service, in all classes, can not compete with either SQ or QF. So, who wins? The consumer.


User currently offlineSydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 2807 posts, RR: 20
Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7096 times:

Quoting TBCITDG (Reply 5):
Wouldn't it be nice if the government granted SQ "some" rights between OZ and the US so long as they break the other duopoly taking place?

SQ hasn't asked from them. Any foray into Australia will be on the densest International routes where Qantas has already significantly developed the market and SQ can piggy back onto that success.

Quoting TG992 (Reply 1):
Mr Gregg said the report failed to take into consideration the large numbers of passengers who flew between the US and Australia each year through stopovers such as Auckland and Tokyo.

The report doesn't even take into consideration passengers flying from Brisbane and Melbourne. Only from Sydney. What the government should do is say to SQ if you want into Sydney you need to help develop traffic out of Melbourne or Brisbane first. Lets make them do some dirty work on the market development side before we hand them a plum route on a platter.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 7):
Full deregulation leads to common denominator service levels dictated by price competition.

SQ wont be engaging in any sort of major price war on the US runs and anyone who thinks they will are delusional. QF makes nice big fat profits off of this route and SQ wants a slice of that profit pie. Besides even if we do grant SQ 1 daily service to Sydney from LAX, QF will still dominate the direct route with 3 dailies plus service to Melbourne, Brisbane and Auckland. So the market may grow slightly but it will be QF and United with their unlimited frequencies that will be there to take advantage of it. If the market starts growing faster then that's great, it means the daily SQ 747 can be an A380 and all the QF services can be A380.

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 9):
However, I think UA would be the one left holding the bag.

Not really. UAL can still draw from its hub in San Francisco and will still be the only airline offering direct service from there. So that is a point of differentiation for them. If UAL does find themselves losing out on SYD-LAX, (which I dont think they will), then what they should do is re-introduce the direct MEL service. Thus they fly SFO-SYD and LAX-MEL and have the direct service to the two largest Australian cities. They'll need a 744ER to do the MEL run though which is a problem in their current state.

Of course the unknown factor in all of this is how much pressure Chris Corrigan and Virgin Blue can bring to bear on the government to delay SQ's access and give them the chance to formulate a strategy to fly Trans-Pac. That would potentially by more damaging to Qantas than SQ would be.


User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24638 posts, RR: 86
Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7083 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

So - if it is granted - is there a quid pro quo?

Does Qantas get some goodie in return?

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20322 posts, RR: 63
Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7050 times:

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 10):
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 7):Full deregulation leads to common denominator service levels dictated by price competition.

SQ wont be engaging in any sort of major price war on the US runs and anyone who thinks they will are delusional.

I'm not quite sure why you selected that sentence to go on about justifying SQ not starting a price war, since it was in response to the effects of global deregulation, not a single flight on a popular run.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineLaxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 24325 posts, RR: 47
Reply 13, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7005 times:

Quoting Mariner (Reply 11):
Does Qantas get some goodie in return?

Qantas for years have enjoyed the very liberal air transport policies of Singapore. Qantas has been able to operate several of its Kangaroo services via Singapore with full traffic rights on all sectors. In addition Qantas has been able to operate mini hub via Singapore were several Qantas aircraft will arrive at about the same time and transfer passengers between them for the onward journey.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineAerohottie From Australia, joined Mar 2004, 792 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6982 times:

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 9):
What is wrong with that.

There is nothing wrong with that... I was merely pointing out that making a point of "lower fares" and "increasing competition" is just a smoke screen. The true story is as stated serveral times now by myself and others that SQ just a slice of a very profitable pie. All the propaganda spewed by the politicians and SQ about increasing competition, developing the market etc etc is just crap.



What?
User currently offlineAerohottie From Australia, joined Mar 2004, 792 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6978 times:

I think NZ should re-enter this route with the new long-haul product...they would kick QF's arse.

(Added - product and service wise I mean, not frequencies blah blah blah, you know what I mean).

[Edited 2005-06-09 10:56:37]


What?
User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11850 posts, RR: 18
Reply 16, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6966 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

I think NZ should re-enter this route with the new long-haul product...they would kick QF's arse. NZ will kick QFs arse on the AKL-LAX route anyway

User currently offlineMariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 24638 posts, RR: 86
Reply 17, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6919 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 13):
Qantas for years have enjoyed the very liberal air transport policies of Singapore. Qantas has been able to operate several of its Kangaroo services via Singapore with full traffic rights on all sectors.

Yes, I thought that. But I was puzzled by a line I read:

http://www.etravelblackboard.com/index.asp?id=38874&nav=2

"Flying to the United States is a major revenue earner for Qantas, which has said letting in Singapore Air would be unfair as it has no reciprocal access to routes out of Singapore."

So I wonder what Qantas would like - what they would consider as "reciprocal access".

cheers

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineZeekiel From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6877 times:

Quoting Aerohottie (Reply 14):
The true story is as stated serveral times now by myself and others that SQ just a slice of a very profitable pie.

The question is if SQ enters the market hypothetically, how would their entrance alter the price of the SYD-LAX airfares. No one really knows and it might end up with slight drops in the price, but there would be enough of a markup over cost (or however they calculate it) to still be really lucrative.

I have no issue with them operating services through SYD. QF operates to SIN from MEL, SYD, PER onwards to LHR and FRA.

Quoting Aerohottie (Reply 15):
I think NZ should re-enter this route with the new long-haul product...they would kick QF's arse.

Yes. It would be nice, especially the premium economy service in its own right. It would be the only airline. Not to mention the AVOD with all this new technology I have been hearing about on the Air New Zealand website. There's been plenty of mail correspondence from Air New Zealand about its AVOD and Business Premier service. Fancy mail as well.

Cheers

Zeekiel


User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5552 posts, RR: 6
Reply 19, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6866 times:

Quoting Laxintl (Reply 13):
Qantas for years have enjoyed the very liberal air transport policies of Singapore. Qantas has been able to operate several of its Kangaroo services via Singapore with full traffic rights on all sectors.

Quoting Mariner (Reply 17)
Flying to the United States is a major revenue earner for Qantas, which has said letting in Singapore Air would be unfair as it has no reciprocal access to routes out of Singapore."

So I wonder what Qantas would like - what they would consider as "reciprocal access".

Currently SQ's rights from Australia and QF's from SIN are about equal. QF 5th freedom rights from SIN are balanced by SQ 6th freedom rights from Oz. I think its a reasonable to ask what's in it for Oz (NOT QF) in letting SQ access transpac routes? (In bilateral treaty terms)

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineUnited Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 9107 posts, RR: 15
Reply 20, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6858 times:

Heard that CX is interested in doing LAX-SYD as well...

Wonder if NZ will resume LAX-SYD service...


User currently offlineTBCITDG From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 921 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6842 times:

No offence to my kiwi counterparts, but in all seriousness, NZ kick QF's ass??
Qf is slowly upgrading all it's aircraft to AVOD, that and the fact that QF still offers a first class product which are viable (maybe not profitable) on the SYD-LAX sectors!
I respect the fact that you admire NZ so much, but it would loose out big time if it where to compete head to head with SQ and QF. I mean, the SQ product speaks for itself and the AA hub in LAX also!


User currently offlineZeekiel From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6836 times:

Quoting TBCITDG (Reply 21):
NZ kick QF's ass??

No no, just it would be nice to see their product operate on the route. Nothing to do with superiority. Are you making any gestures towards superiority and QF?

No just kidding .

I still have a soft spot for QF and will be travelling at the end of the year on QF to LHR from MEL and guess what TBCITDG, on First Class. Yay!!!

I just have the gripe with Air New Zealand having absolutely no Business Premier or Business Clasas seats on FF points or Airpoints Dollars to LHR at the end of the year. Discount ones that is. Unlike QF.

Cheers

Zeekiel

[Edited 2005-06-09 13:17:07]

User currently offlineAerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 2634 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6818 times:

Aerowesty: Funny because the growth you have seen in global commercial aviation is a direct result of liberalisation within and between countries. the more the better for consumers, who can then chose between higher prices for greater service quality, or lower fares with a corresponding lowering of services. So many on this site just don't seem to understand that the colourful world of aviation we have today would be far smaller and far more dull without deregulation.

Anyway, I say let SQ have what it wants. QF enjoys a Singapore hub so why not a reciprocal situation? It'a pretty hard to argue against that isn't it?

And the more capacity there is in the market the more pressure there is on prices to fall, unless of course demand is sufficient enough. So SQ would not be "eveloping new markets", just giving the consumer more choice. Where is the harm in that except denting the too-long protected Qantas?


User currently offlineTBCITDG From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 921 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (8 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6815 times:

Maybe I'll see you on board Zee??
Make sure you drink the cabin dry of Dom Perignon in first!!!!!


25 Post contains images Zeekiel : That would be nice mate. Have a chat and have some champers. Drinking the cabin dry. No probs there. I was more concerned about the cabin air drinkin
26 Nickofatlanta : Interesting to note that Singapore has also allowed a partly-QF owner JetStar Asia to base itself out of SIN as well.
27 CXoneWorld : What's more interesting to note, the partly-QF owned Jetstar Asia has been denied access to crucial markets such as Indonesia and China, despite Sing
28 AeroWesty : And I agree. But I don't agree that it brings "better service with lower fares" over the long haul which is the statement my comment responded to.
29 Airtropolis : Quoting CXoneWorld (Reply 27): "What's more interesting to note, the partly-QF owned Jetstar Asia has been denied access to crucial markets such as In
30 Laxintl : I believe especially in the case of China, the bilateral does not allow for more service, nor the designation of additional airlines between the coun
31 CXoneWorld : I don't see how your mentioning of Temasek's modest stake in Jetstar Asia has undermined the above line of argument. In all that matters, Jetstar's a
32 Laxintl : I do not have a copy of the China/Singapore bilateral, however if it has any similarity with some of the other China bilaterals there are specific li
33 Airtropolis : Re: CXoneWorld's reply 31: All I have to say is that with the Singapore government having a stake in JetStar Asia, it has no interest in hindering the
34 Aviasian : Aerohottie: SQ's services have been price - competitive in many of the markets it serve, and the consumer gains from such competition. Even where SQ c
35 LACA773 : I also thought VS wanted a part of this as well? LACA773
36 Gemuser : Quote=Aviasian,reply=34 Aerohottie: SQ's services have been price - competitive in many of the markets it serve, and the consumer gains from such comp
37 Aerorobnz : If the loads over the last month are anything to go by NZ kicks QFs ass already, even with a dated product. QF does well, but NZ does better still. Q
38 Avalon : Qantas argues that it does not currently enjoy reciprocal access from Singapore. An example is that QF recently discontinued its flights to Paris (vi
39 Avek00 : Thankfully, I believe that the Aussies have learned some lessons from EK's introduction into the OZ-NZ market and will not allow SQ onto SYD-LAX.
40 PhilSquares : I don't think that is quite the story. QF has unlimited traffic rights out of Singapore. My understanding is the French gov't was the roadblock. In f
41 Zvezda : OZ should grant SQ full onward rights because it would directly benefit Australian consumers and the Australian tourism industry.
42 Avalon : I would disagree and stand by my assertion above, on the basis that it was reported consistently in the Australian press that the Australian minister
43 Airbazar : Well, for what it's worth, I can tell you for a fact that in the JFK-FRA route SQ consistently has one of the lower fares. So, it's been known to hap
44 Post contains links PhilSquares : Please see the following link. The quote is right from the horse's mouth. The issue is between the French and Australian govt, not Singapore. www.qan
45 Avalon : OK, thanks for the link.
46 Ex_SQer : I don't see anyone addressing this question, so I'll attempt to tackle it. You are not incorrect in making this assertion. However, while 5th freedom
47 AirNewZealand : In regards to AirNZ 'Kicking Arse" on the LAX runs, i would have you think again. Sources say that LAX is one of NZ's most unprofitable routes flown (
48 Aerorobnz : which sources would those be exactly? Sure the money is more in cargo than pax, but cargo is good and the pax loads are doing well, so that ices the
49 NZ1 : This is true. In fact the flight to LHR from LAX and return has lost money for a while now. I doubt it my friend. We have to fly there and LHR just t
50 Aerohottie : NZ1 - you are talking a load of crap. I have also seen figures going back as far as before ansett during my studies, and the brief you just gave is ut
51 Aerohottie : Wrong!!!! Perhaps NZ wouldn't be in trouble without the LAX flights, but they certainly wouldn't be in the viable position they are now if it wasn't
52 Gemuser : Care to offer some support for this blanket statement? It is not a given that the entry of SQ would have a net economic benfit to Oz. I have not seen
53 KFly : Looks like it's not going to happen. "AUSTRALIA has refused to give Singapore Airlines (SIA) access to the highly lucrative Australia-United States ro
54 Post contains links QANTAS077 : NO GO, it was announced on friday evening, the full article below via the link. THE Howard Government will continue to protect Qantas from extra compe
55 Kahala777 : What??? If that is true, why is Air New Zealand one of the most expensive options in the market? Aloha, Kahala777
56 Kahala777 : Singapore Airlines, is a great airline. Qantas, is a great airline. Air New Zealand, is a great airline. United, is again trying to become a great air
57 Gemuser : You cant just write the sixth freedom rights off as theoritical! They were a factor in the negotiations. If Oz didnt get the fifth freedom rights SIN
58 Aerorobnz : I'll try and have a look at them myself tomorrow. Or failing that I may be able to ask the GGMs/Ralph Norris at the seminar I'm attending next week a
59 Post contains links Airtropolis : The decision of the Australian government and Qantas' antics leading towards that decision are dissapointing to say the least, though I am sure there
60 NZ1 : Tell you what, Ill talk to Ralph myself, hell I see him everyday, lets see what he says. During your studies huh?? So you work in management do you?
61 N77014 : Are we defining service based on how tasty the canapes are? UA's route network and ASM's dwarf QF/SQ. The ability to serve nearly every major niche i
62 777ER : Now that SQ has lost their bid, I wouldn't be surprised if the Singapore government change their open skys agreement or refuse to allow QF to operate
63 Gemuser : If they did the Oz government simply reduces SQ capacity on Oz routes to half of the estimated O&D traffic and prohibits the sale of 6th freedom tick
64 Shawnnyc : You are very right. I think sometimes people feel that 6th Freedom are a right and nothing needs to be given for them. The fact remains that both SQ
65 Ex_SQer : That would go against Singapore's aviation policy of structuring liberal bilaterals to attract more carriers to Changi. The fact is that Singapore ha
66 Aerohottie : Talking about the AKL-LAX-LAX route..... Again NZ1 read what I said....(the bread and butter of the INTERNATIONAL NETWORK!!!!!). Yes I know the profit
67 NZ1 : I never said you were at a polytech. I merely referred to it as a place to study etc. I know the 2 people you have mentioned well. Thanks. I think you
68 Gemuser : It has been done, I was part of it. Calling it large scale, is debatable, but it ran 3 months and there was at least one before the one I was involve
69 EK156 : Do you think that EK would also get SYD-LAX in the future? I mean if the Australian Government gives SQ the rights ... if they ever... Do you think ot
70 Aerohottie : I thought UAE had open skies policies with both the US and OZ... so dont EK have the rights needed to operate SYD/LAX already???
71 Sllevin : Yes, to Singapore's benefit, as people often take a stopover in Singapore and do significant shopping. While it's nice to have rights SIN-LHR and LHR
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...
SQ Vs AC On The LAX-SYD Route posted Sat Mar 4 2006 04:32:55 by AC330
Reported Decision On SQ Rights SYD-LAX posted Mon Jun 13 2005 02:03:36 by SunriseValley
Mayrhuber: LH "Not In A Hurry" To Decide On 748I posted Tue Nov 14 2006 08:55:38 by Leelaw
Judge Decision On Mesaba Contracts Late Next Week posted Thu Jun 29 2006 20:31:36 by KarlB737
When Was The Last 747sp Flight On The LAX-SYD? posted Sun Jun 25 2006 01:20:29 by 747400sp
Royal Jordain To Decide On WB Replacement posted Tue Mar 28 2006 11:07:21 by Flying-Tiger
Aeroflot To Choose Between A350 And 787 Next Week posted Fri Oct 28 2005 11:38:38 by Keesje
Qatar Has Yet To Decide On 787/A350 Order posted Thu Jun 9 2005 21:47:44 by CXoneWorld
ATA To Begin 2x Daily PHX-DEN Next Week! posted Fri May 13 2005 17:35:58 by Jmc1975
Boeing To Decide On Wide-body 747 By Mid-year -CEO posted Wed Feb 2 2005 19:02:51 by NYC777