Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CX Trans-Pacific Competition  
User currently offlineAirlineFanatic From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 222 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 4 months 2 hours ago) and read 2778 times:

UA announced LAX-HKG and now Oasis Hong Kong announces HKG-YVR... I am sure CX will perform well they have an excellent product, but they will have to be competitive with fares that they might not have had too in the past.


thoughts?

8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJetdeltamsy From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2987 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 1 hour ago) and read 2750 times:

I think Oasis Hong Kong will probably be a flash-in-the-pan. They are starting out in markets where establshed carriers (Qantas, Virgin, NWA, United, BA) will fight vigorously to protect their business. They will assault Oasis on price, capacity, timing, with frequent flyer program promotions...anyway possible to keep Oasis a tiny presence or to force them out altogether.

I don't think CX is at much risk for losing business as they offer a long established, superior product.



Tired of airline bankruptcies....EA/PA/TW and finally DL.
User currently offlineNorcal773 From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1447 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 1 hour ago) and read 2736 times:

Quoting Jetdeltamsy (Reply 1):
I don't think CX is at much risk for losing business as they offer a long established, superior product.

They sure do but if Oasis Hong Kong keeps offering the low fares they're offering, CX will have to do something because they'll lose some business. Keep in mind the majority of travelers will go with the cheapest fare.



If you're going through hell, keep going
User currently offlineLurveBus From Philippines, joined Mar 2007, 286 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2551 times:

CX has its Chinese, Indian, Australian, and Southeast Asian networks to feed those transpacs. There is no way Oasis can offer the same seamless connectivity out of HKG that CX does.

User currently offlineBjornstrom From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 329 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2411 times:

Don't forget that SQ has a very profitable route through HKG to the US.


Eurobonus Gold | BMI Gold | http://my.flightmemory.com/bjornstrom/
User currently offlineJakob77 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2198 times:

Oasis doesn't have any interline or hub-to-spoke network and thus only targets O&D traffic out of HKG.

Based at HKG, CX naturally commands a premium for tickets ex-HKG.
With Oasis, CX will finally get a bit of competition out of its home market.

The battle between CX and O8 is only for O&D passengers out of HKG.

It is ironic O8 is flying the same routes CX started flying back in the 80s when CX began flying then "ultra" long-haul flights.
ie London was the 1st European flight... and YVR was the first transpacific flight.


User currently offlineGemini573 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 146 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2178 times:

I wish O8 luck on HKG-OAK. As some with the previous response, the battle is with O&D passengers. For me personally, there's no way, I would connect on to Southwest to take another flight elsewhere from Oakland. I don't take normally take LCCs, but don't they have less generous baggage allowance?

I remember taking a Ryanair flight from Brussels (Chaleroi), to Stansted and the fare was only £19, but then I had 20kg and ended up paying almost 60 Euros for the excess luggage. I didn't know at the time.

That's why I imagine on their HKG-LGW flights, it must be mostly O&D traffic. If you had connecting passengers who had to hop on EasyJet, many of those passengers would be in for a rude awakening as these LLCs don't allow much in baggage allowance.

For me, I prefer CX. I much rather deal with a carrier that has inter-line with other carriers.

[Edited 2007-05-08 17:20:43]

User currently offlineAstral From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2007 times:

Oasis number one target market in YVR is not really CX, but those already taking lower rates flights on JL, KE, CI, and BR (MU too). By using connecting flights, these carriers retail fares in the ethnic Chinese market is at par with what Oasis is offering. At the same prices, these passengers would be drawn to the non-stop service by Oasis.
Second target market are those that can only afford to travel once every three years, now they can go at least once a year, plus those now can afford to travel twice a year.
CX is increasing its summer schedule to three times a day, a very significant increase in seat availability. They are droping the lowest prices level, and has the larger seat volumn to make tactical adjustment to compete with Oasis - if necessary.
Do note aside from the lowest Oasis rates at $299 one way ($600 return), once that seat bucket is sold out, the next level fares at $700 range is similar to all other connection carriers. On tactical fares level movement, Oasis will be facing an uphill battle with CX, and at a certain level loss its pricing advantages with connection carriers.
One major factor Oasis will be facing is IROPS (Iregular Operations - i.e. delays/cancellation). All network carriers have interline agreement, and can endorse passengers to each other for protection if necessary. Oasis has non, thus once in an IROPS situtation, it would be very difficult for passengers. Their capacity for such recovery is extremely limited, thus at a much higher recovery cost. The longer the distance you fly, the longer in time and money it cost to recover from IROPS. One such IROPS can wipe out a whole month of revenue.
Oasis entry to YVR is not that bad a corporate decision for a O&D only carrier catering for mainly Hong Kong ethnic Chinese market. However, It would be interesting to watch how Oasis would 'play' in the YVR market, only time can tell.


User currently offlineMultimark From Canada, joined Jul 2006, 796 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1780 times:

Too bad Westjet is still playing footsie with Oneworld. It would be a logical tie-up for them, as an LCC, to make an agreement to feed Oasis Canadian traffic.

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...
Why Is N805NW Flying Trans-Pacific? posted Sat Jul 22 2006 07:12:07 by Pilottim747
767 Trans-Pacific? posted Sun Dec 18 2005 17:35:28 by Warreng24
I'm On A NWA Trans Pacific Flight Now, Biz Class posted Mon Dec 12 2005 12:29:26 by Redneckslim
New Concept (To Australia) In Trans-Pacific Flights posted Sun Dec 4 2005 04:24:44 by Simpilicity
Need For Trans-Pacific Charters DEC06-JAN07 posted Wed Nov 16 2005 07:29:38 by Simpilicity
Trans-Pacific Charters? posted Tue Nov 1 2005 23:49:34 by Simpilicity
Qantas & United To Keep Trans-Pacific Duopoly posted Wed Jun 15 2005 17:26:45 by Oakmad
Trans Pacific And Asia Flights posted Sat May 21 2005 02:40:21 by UniTED
Air NZ DC-10 Trans-Pacific Routings posted Sat Feb 12 2005 20:05:50 by ETA Unknown
Why Are There No Trans Pacific Red-Eyes To NRT? posted Sun Jan 9 2005 04:24:31 by Malaysia