boeingfever777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 409 posts, RR: 56 Posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 10471 times:
I was looking at the carriers that fly this route and was looking at frequencies... Does this route have overkill, is it just right, or could it sustain another carrier trying this route?
DL 1x 77L
QF 2x 744/a380
UA 1x 744
VA 1x 77W
With the global economic downturn I was curious as to if this route is a profitable as it was say 5 years ago? I know that UA and QF were only flying it back then. I know the competition has to be killer!
There are still 4-5 QF aircraft parked at LAX most of the day. Two arrive from SYD, one each from MEL, BNE & AKL. All arrive by about 10:00 am and all leave after 9:00 pm, one does the LAX-JFK-LAX tag during this period. This is only one less than the all time high of 6 when there was a third SYD-LAX on some days of the week.
SQ wanted in on the route when it was super premium with great yields. They claimed that they were trying to inject competition into the route, but let's not kid ourselves. Now that there's adequate competition, SQ has lots its bargaining position with the Aussies. Additionally, now that yields have taken a dive, its doubtful that they want in on the bloodbath.
I'm not sure about that. Each of the four airlines has a hub/focus city on one (and in cases both) end(s) of the flight. Additionally, all 4 airlines are based in one of the two respective countries connected by the LAX-SYD route. Let's be honest, how many people would decide to fly LAX-SYD and instantly think of flying Singapore Airlines? One can make the argument that SQ's Star partner UA is hubbed at LAX, but the carriers don't currently codeshare and I doubt that UA would really welcome SQ on the route.
Gemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5240 posts, RR: 6 Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 9990 times:
Quoting boeingfever777 (Thread starter): Does this route have overkill, is it just right, or could it sustain another carrier trying this route?
Lets inject a few [rough] numbers into the debate, shall we?
From the BITRE web site total pax SYD-LAX & LAX-SYD = 558566 for 09 and 560138 for 08. Or about 1530 pax per day in 09 and 1534 pax per day in 08.
Total capacity in 09 was about 1837 seats per day. 1 DL B77L, 1 V-Oz B77W, 1 UA B744, 1 QF B744 and 1 QF A380. [I know it varies and that QF is only going daily with the A380 this year and there are different configurations for the B744s, but its a reasonable rough average]
That gives an average annual load factor of 84% for 09. Not brilliant, but not bad. Given its a rough annual averge, I'd say capacity matches demand reasonably well. But I say nothing about average fares or total revenaue.
jfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 7410 posts, RR: 7 Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 9118 times:
Quoting boeingfever777 (Thread starter): With the global economic downturn I was curious as to if this route is a profitable as it was say 5 years ago? I know that UA and QF were only flying it back then. I know the competition has to be killer!
Qantas used to charge $10,000 for a roundtrip Business class seat, now its half that.
Gemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5240 posts, RR: 6 Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8430 times:
Quoting AirCanada014 (Reply 12): don't forget AC wanted to fly from YYZ-LAX-SYD and use their 5th freedom on LAX-SYD but doesn't have approval from Australian government yet. they have approval from the USA
They don't have approval, because it is not allowed by the current Australia/Canada bilateral treaty. I believe that Canada canceled the first round of talks on a new bilateral.
BTW AC could fly SFO-SYD immediately, if it wanted too.
StarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3234 posts, RR: 9 Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8380 times:
Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 11): If there were any capacity room left on this route, I would love to see AA flying it as well.
I don't think AA needs to because they can code share with QF on this route and I think they are much better suited as a feeder for QF and Qantas could up the capacity a lot easier when they get more A380's. I think that QF is one of the things that sustains the daily LAX-YYZ-LAX on AA but I could be dead wrong.
Quoting Gemuser (Reply 13): BTW AC could fly SFO-SYD immediately, if it wanted too.
They should and I think they might when they get their 787's, however NZ is still can compete on this route even though you have to stop in AKL.
tayser From Australia, joined Mar 2008, 1087 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 8110 times:
And not forgetting that demand for SYD is artificially inflated by MEL and BNE.
i.e I read 6 months ago on here that approx 500k people from MEL are routed via SYD annually (all international destinations) - enough to fill 3-4 744/380s everyday. They're probably heading to North Asia (PEK, PVG, NRT, ICN primarily), North America (SFO, YVR and LAX on the UA, QF and AC services that run into SYD), South America and South Africa. Hence it's easy to see why VA have chosen to tap into the direct MEL-JNB market, albeit twice a week is pretty paltry.
The sooner the VA gets more 77Ws to ramp up direct service MEL-LAX and the DL joint venture gets approved by Uncle Sam's government, the better. I flew VA11 on 9th Feb with an approximate 60% load and VA12 on Tuesday (2nd March) and had a similar load. Not surprising they only offer the service - you guessed it - twice a week.
IndianicWorld From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 2405 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 7796 times:
The frequency argument is a valid one in some ways, but in other viewpoint, atleast it gives a start point to build on. The LAX and soon to be JNB routes from MEL will never be ultra high yielding routes and are mainly tailored towards tourists, so boosting capacity to meet demand is a good strategic decision.
It is true though that a lot of pax are funnelled through SYD from MEL and that prices are often higher on the non-stop options, but hey, atleast the options are there. MEL has shown it is a market that has grown leaps and bounds over the past 10 years, with airlines building service where they see it can be justified at a viable position. In the meantime MEL pax will have to be funnelled onto SYD services at times until the case is solid for direct service to begin.
tayser From Australia, joined Mar 2008, 1087 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7761 times:
When 1/3 of the plane's cabin space is devoted to premium cabins (and that 1/3 is further divided into 2/3 business and 1/3 Y+) I wouldn't exactly argue that they're aiming more at the tourist traffic.
VA were conceived to battle QF mainline head on on the Pacific, not JQ!
ANstar From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 4872 posts, RR: 6 Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7744 times:
Quoting tayser (Reply 18): Yeah that's true, but what's more likely to succeed and more importantly attract higher yielding traffic? A 2x weekly service or waiting for aircraft and starting at 4-5x weekly (on MEL-LAX)?
Given MEL pax can also go via BNE/SYD I think 2 x weekly is ok for MEL. They could have gone 3 x weekly but decided it better to send the aircraft to HKT. That plan seems to be working as I hear the HKT flights are VERY popular.
Obviously 2 x weekly is not ideal, but it is better than no direct service at all. At least VA aren't shunning flights from MEL as QF seem to do. I mean what long haul does QF fly from MEL these days HKG, SIN & LAX? VA already have the same amount of destinations JNB, HKT and LAX.
As more aircraft arrive frequencies will be lifted. I say good on them for trying new things.
deltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 8628 posts, RR: 8 Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7447 times:
Quoting tayser (Reply 16): The sooner the VA gets more 77Ws to ramp up direct service MEL-LAX and the DL joint venture gets approved by Uncle Sam's government, the better. I flew VA11 on 9th Feb with an approximate 60% load and VA12 on Tuesday (2nd March) and had a similar load. Not surprising they only offer the service - you guessed it - twice a week.
You can fly LAX-SYD-MEL on DL/DJ also. IMO we will see a DL 77L on LAX-MEL at some point.(sooner not later)
"Oh look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky! Look at the sUGAr falling out of the sky!" LM 1922-2011 Go Dawgs! G.A.T.A.
When V Australia and Delta announced their plans to serve the route, of the 4 airlines many thought UA would end up being the weakest and perhaps even withdraw. Therefore its interesting they are the one to increase capacity (with a daily 744 no less), even if its seasonal.
So does a second LAX-SYD make more sense for UA than the LAX-MEL they've done in the past?