Laxintl From United States, joined May 2000, 9320 posts, RR: 12 Posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3243 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.
TG992 From New Zealand, joined Jan 2001, 2552 posts, RR: 10 Reply 1, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3216 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.
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 8832 posts, RR: 14 Reply 2, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3195 times:
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.
Don't forget to check out my youtube movies in my profile!
Aerohottie From New Zealand, joined Mar 2004, 597 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3167 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.
Ahem, US Carriers. The Hub and Spoke theory doesn't always work.
TBCITDG From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 921 posts, RR: 2 Reply 5, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3143 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?
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 9660 posts, RR: 60 Reply 6, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3131 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.
AeroWesty From United States, joined Oct 2004, 15527 posts, RR: 62 Reply 7, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3106 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.
Aerohottie From New Zealand, joined Mar 2004, 597 posts, RR: 2 Reply 8, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3098 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.
Ahem, US Carriers. The Hub and Spoke theory doesn't always work.
PhilSquares From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 3739 posts, RR: 53 Reply 9, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3080 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.
Sydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 1365 posts, RR: 3 Reply 10, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3044 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.
AeroWesty From United States, joined Oct 2004, 15527 posts, RR: 62 Reply 12, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2998 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.
Laxintl From United States, joined May 2000, 9320 posts, RR: 12 Reply 13, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2953 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
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.
Ahem, US Carriers. The Hub and Spoke theory doesn't always work.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 10482 posts, RR: 79 Reply 17, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2867 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.
Yes, I thought that. But I was puzzled by a line I read:
"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".
Zeekiel From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2825 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.
Gemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 2533 posts, RR: 3 Reply 19, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2814 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".
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined May 2000, 9320 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jan 2001, 2552 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 921 posts, 
From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 9660 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 3739 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts,