Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Rumour: Jetstar To Start SYD-AKL-SFO In August  
User currently offlineAlitaliaDC10 From Australia, joined Dec 2008, 240 posts, RR: 1
Posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 11606 times:

Now that QF is operating it's last SFO-SYD on 07MAY11, I've heard some rumours JQ will take over from August using 332s SYD-AKL-SFO...not sure how accurate that is, plus with only around 8 x 332s do they even have the available planes to do this?


Orbis non sufficit
37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineShnoob940 From Australia, joined Sep 2008, 185 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 11519 times:

That would be great, extremely low fares to the US if you don't a few hours without entertainment.
I'm flying SYD-DFW return for $998AUD!!



A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A343 A388 733 734 735 737 738 739 743 744 762 763 773 788 E170 E190 Q400
User currently offlineThe Coachman From Australia, joined Apr 2001, 1429 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 11348 times:

It wouldn't be competitive IMHO.

It's no different to NZ where the service would be better with full frills.

Fares would be have to be a fair bit lower - and what would happen to yields and the break-even load factor.

I don't think it will happen until the 787.



M88, 722, 732, 733, 734, 73G, 73H, 742, 743, 744, 752, 762, 763, 772, 773, 77W, 320, 332, 333, 345, 388, DH8, SF3 - want
User currently offlineaerorobnz From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 7184 posts, RR: 13
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 11264 times:

It would have to be at a time when AIAL can fit another USA bound aircraft in, as they have to go from particular gates. This may limit options somewhat.

User currently offlinealangirvan From New Zealand, joined Nov 2000, 2106 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 10950 times:

Quoting The Coachman (Reply 2):
It wouldn't be competitive IMHO.

It's no different to NZ where the service would be better with full frills.

Fares would be have to be a fair bit lower - and what would happen to yields and the break-even load factor.

I don't think it will happen until the 787.
Quoting Shnoob940 (Reply 1):
That would be great, extremely low fares to the US if you don't a few hours without entertainment.

You do get entertainment - they hand out ipads!

People will prepay the meals entertainment and blow up pillow, so you do get some frills. Yields and break even will be what ever whatever Jetstar want to set as a target. Will this be a service where Qantas will codeshare as they do on other JQ longhaul services? JQ already has an interlining agreement with AA, perhaps JQ will work with other US carriers at SFO.


User currently offlineweebie From Australia, joined Dec 2009, 202 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 10930 times:

with 80k Australians visiting America every month I'm not suprised.

User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4906 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 10546 times:

With JQ taking on the first NEW B787s and rapidly expanding the Asia market I'm not surprised if this 'rumour' becomes reality...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineIndianicWorld From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 2955 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 10336 times:

Quoting weebie (Reply 5):
with 80k Australians visiting America every month I'm not suprised.

If the dollar tanks , then that market drops dramatically. Who knows what will happen.

Thats why I fear for all this capacity at present on the US-Australia routes, especially SYD-LAX, which is likely not showing true demand characteristics at present. Fares are still fairly low, higher Australian outbound travel due to the higher $AUD and surprisingly good American demand also. If the conditions change, it may not be so rosey.

As for this rumour, I dont see it happening anytime soon.


User currently offlineanstar From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 5190 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 9890 times:

Quoting The Coachman (Reply 2):
It wouldn't be competitive IMHO.

It's no different to NZ where the service would be better with full frills.

JQ will have lower fares and will be able to capture enough market to make it work. They seem to be able to make AKL-SIN work where NZ couldnt make it work.

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 7):

Thats why I fear for all this capacity at present on the US-Australia routes, especially SYD-LAX, which is likely not showing true demand characteristics at present.

Has capacity on SYD-LAX changed that much since the dollar was higher?? I seem to recall it hasnt had an increase since VA/DL started flying. The dollar was around 70c then.


User currently offlineTruemanQLD From Australia, joined Feb 2007, 1528 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 9635 times:

I hope this comes true. Will be great to see more JQ international expansion. For those saying that it wont work with NZ already on the route, it will likely take a lot of the market QF created for OZ-SFO flights, rather than 'steal' from NZ. Hope this comes true!

User currently offlinesydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 3006 posts, RR: 20
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 9542 times:

Quoting The Coachman (Reply 2):
I don't think it will happen until the 787.

And Jetstar still doesn't know when they are arriving!

I'd agree and say that JQ will wait for the 787 and do SYD-SFO direct. Or they could just extend the SYD-HNL through to SFO. AA is dropping the route so JQ wouldn't be competing against an allied carrier.


User currently offlineIndianicWorld From Australia, joined Jun 2001, 2955 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 9491 times:

Quoting anstar (Reply 8):
Has capacity on SYD-LAX changed that much since the dollar was higher?? I seem to recall it hasnt had an increase since VA/DL started flying. The dollar was around 70c then.

The increase of capacity was at a fairly low price point for all carriers. Its hard to accurately pinpoint what the actual underlying demand is , with things like high $AUD or low fares creating coming into the picture. Time will tell I guess.

It will be interesting to see how it all performs if things change greatly over the next couple of years.

Quoting anstar (Reply 8):
JQ will have lower fares and will be able to capture enough market to make it work. They seem to be able to make AKL-SIN work where NZ couldnt make it work.

SIN is a 3K/JQ/QF hub though, which gives it greater chance of working. NZ had SQ already on the route, which made little sense for them to continue to fly there with its own metal.


User currently offlinevaustralie From Australia, joined Jul 2010, 182 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 9445 times:

I'd fly them SYD-AKL-SFO if it was cheap enough to get there.

I've flown long haul with JQ before and it was just fine - and with their new class JetPlus (my Adobe isnt working so it won't load the details) but I think you get a meal and entertainment unit for a few dollars (maybe $50-$70) and I think this would sell well on long haul to SFO.
I think they'd do well on this route IF the price was right.



a346
User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6417 posts, RR: 38
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 9113 times:

Quoting anstar (Reply 8):
They seem to be able to make AKL-SIN work where NZ couldnt make it work.

At least JQ have connections throughout SE Asia through Jetstar Asia. NZ had decent loads and there were people who actually preferred flying NZ to SIN over SQ. But the sour relationship between NZ and SQ must have had some influence and also the fact that NZ didn't carry on to any other destinations with passengers having to transfer to SQ anyway may have made NZ to decide to search for other routes instead.


I'm not so sure if the Qantas Group want to cannabalise their QF AKL-LAX loads either. It seems like it could have the ability to reduce fares between AKL and North America otherwise. If SIN can be made profitable by JQ, I don't see how SFO can't be either. But I'm thinking JQ might want to start making some inroads with connections with AA etc if they were to go through with this.



It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlineUnclekoru From New Zealand, joined Oct 2009, 302 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 8865 times:

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 13):
At least JQ have connections throughout SE Asia through Jetstar Asia. NZ had decent loads and there were people who actually preferred flying NZ to SIN over SQ. But the sour relationship between NZ and SQ must have had some influence and also the fact that NZ didn't carry on to any other destinations with passengers having to transfer to SQ anyway may have made NZ to decide to search for other routes instead.



I think you've summed up the reasons behind NZ's failure on the SIN route quite nicely.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 13):
I'm not so sure if the Qantas Group want to cannabalise their QF AKL-LAX loads either. It seems like it could have the ability to reduce fares between AKL and North America otherwise. If SIN can be made profitable by JQ, I don't see how SFO can't be either. But I'm thinking JQ might want to start making some inroads with connections with AA etc if they were to go through with this.



AKL would be a tech stop as much as anything. A nice fillup for demand as well I guess. As we are all aware, if JQ want to operate Oz/USA with the A330, then they've got to stop somewhere. HNL is problematic due cabotage. Where else would you stop? No, this would be about low fare OZ-US traffic, I doubt it would have too much impact on AKL's LAX service (although I wonder if this isn't a candidate for "orange-isation" eventually).



It sounds like english, but I can't understand a word you're saying
User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6417 posts, RR: 38
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 8745 times:

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 14):
I doubt it would have too much impact on AKL's LAX service (although I wonder if this isn't a candidate for "orange-isation" eventually).

I think QF still have to be careful though. USA has basically been duopolised by the 2 full service carriers of NZ and QF for a long time. As people start accepting the long haul low cost model as a viable method of travel, it could well diminish returns for the other flights, so long as there's some capacity. I'm sure you'll get a whole lot of people that'd still prefer to fly to SFO on either QF or NZ. You'd have to wonder how low JQ's fares would have to be to attract them away from flying NZ which would mean a stop in AKL anyway or how much NZ's fares would drop if JQ were taking a lot of passengers away from them. It's an interesting puzzle I think.

Quoting aerorobnz (Reply 3):
It would have to be at a time when AIAL can fit another USA bound aircraft in, as they have to go from particular gates. This may limit options somewhat.

I just had another think about this.. Either around the departures of QF26 or NZ2 means that it'll get to SFO at a nice enough time. I'm not sure if QF would extend this to any other place either therefore it'd hang around SFO for a while anyway before returning.



It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlineManekS From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 241 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8002 times:

Quoting Unclekoru (Reply 14):
I think you've summed up the reasons behind NZ's failure on the SIN route quite nicely.

Real shame they stopped. I too, would've preferred NZ to SQ but I'm hopeful they'll be back some day!


User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9607 posts, RR: 52
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 7009 times:

Quoting sydscott (Reply 10):

I'd agree and say that JQ will wait for the 787 and do SYD-SFO direct. Or they could just extend the SYD-HNL through to SFO. AA is dropping the route so JQ wouldn't be competing against an allied carrier.

HNL-SFO would have very low load factors. It doesn't matter that AA pulled the route since JQ can't sell HNL-SFO tickets. I can't imagine it being justified.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineas739x From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 6124 posts, RR: 23
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5732 times:

Why in the world would they start it now? I can see JetStar starting SFO once the 787's are received. This would save QF the embarrassment of restarting SFO a 3rd time. But if JetStar was to start SFO so soon after QF, you'd think they would have just done a transition over and not discontinuing service.


"Some pilots avoid storm cells and some play connect the dots!"
User currently offline6thfreedom From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 3325 posts, RR: 20
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5104 times:

Not sure if JQ will do this, but there are 4 reasons to consider it:

1. sector was served by QF, so the market is well known.

2. VA has indicated it would look at SFO flights, so KQ going in first could be a defensive move.

3. what are NZ yields like on AKL-SFO? If they are good, JQ would want a price of the action.

4. the AKL hub would allow JQ to connect a number of trans-Tasman flight to SFO. If SFO is end destination, probably a better option to connect in AKL rather than LAX.


User currently offlinelaca773 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 4008 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4585 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting 6thfreedom (Reply 19):
Not sure if JQ will do this, but there are 4 reasons to consider it:

1. sector was served by QF, so the market is well known.

2. VA has indicated it would look at SFO flights, so KQ going in first could be a defensive move.

3. what are NZ yields like on AKL-SFO? If they are good, JQ would want a price of the action.

4. the AKL hub would allow JQ to connect a number of trans-Tasman flight to SFO. If SFO is end destination, probably a better option to connect in AKL rather than LAX.

Would those who traditionally fly QF be receptive to JQ operating this particularly long flight with a low cost model? How would QF passengers who pay J fares adjust to JQ's C product?


User currently offlineBraniff727Ultra From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 109 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4457 times:

Quoting as739x (Reply 18):
Why in the world would they start it now? I can see JetStar starting SFO once the 787's are received. This would save QF the embarrassment of restarting SFO a 3rd time. But if JetStar was to start SFO so soon after QF, you'd think they would have just done a transition over and not discontinuing service.

Very true; (see the thread on last QF flight from SFO) this has been an ongoing discussion over the past several days in another thread.

As much as I would rather QF not have suspended flights to/from SFO; it makes no sense to for all intense re-strart that service just a few months later. Yes, the service was "switched" to DFW not dropped altogether, but it just would look as if QF was grasping at straws/throwing darts otherwise.

Sadly until the 787 is available there won't be any direct Aussie service to SFO. LAX will continue as a QF stronghold as they already maintain 4 flights per day and AA has T4 all to themselves with plans to grow their presence to feed off. Also it doesn't hurt that T4 is right next to TBIT! No long trudge across the airport when connecting from one OW company to the other. On a personal note I am a huge LAX fan so as long as the redtail keeps flying to/from LAX all is good.


User currently offlineTruemanQLD From Australia, joined Feb 2007, 1528 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4185 times:

Why would QF not do SYD-SFO-DFW-SFO-SYD? That way they get both markets and remove the annoying stop over in BNE

User currently offlinelegacyins From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 2070 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4142 times:

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 22):
Why would QF not do SYD-SFO-DFW-SFO-SYD? That way they get both markets and remove the annoying stop over in BNE

Because you would be making people do a 2 stop to their final destination. Flying into DFW directly would allow passengers to untilize AA vast hub and allow people to 1 stop to their final destination. The vast majority of people, IMO, will be using DFW as a connecting point and not as their final destination.



John@SFO
User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6417 posts, RR: 38
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4123 times:

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 22):

The SFO-DFW-SFO cannot really be performed profitably due to cabotage rules because QF doesn't have the rights to carry domestic passengers (just clarifing it as if you didn't know; but believe you would anyway). Firstly, this would counter the desire for QF to connect directly and efficiently with AA's hub in DFW. I guess QF have figured out that loads to DFW should be good enough to sustain its own flight without having to set priorities for certain people only going to SFO and those going on to DFW. The thing about the LAX-JFK route is that it combines passengers from SYD, BNE, MEL and AKL who wish to make the trip to the East Coast. Having only one flight into SFO and the same flight making a trip over to DFW seems extremely inefficient.

The stopover in BNE makes more sense as to allow basically a seamless route to DFW direct. Even then, the short hop is probably more desirable by QF as they can fill up the remaining seats to SYD and it's only something that is performed in one direction. Indirectly, I suppose, it allows people to go to BNE from DFW.



It's all about the destination AND the journey.
25 aerokiwi : I think you'll eventually see QF pull out of AKL-LAX and JQ replace them. JQ is in a prime position to make ex-NZ routes work where NZ has failed (Se
26 Burkhard : I'm impressed that the A332 is able to cross the Southern Pacific, can it really do that with reasonable load?
27 TruemanQLD : I believe so, QF has been doing it for a while, on and off between A332 and 744 and even did the tag LAX-JFK with it at some point. I am not aware of
28 Unclekoru : Can't give you figures but understand they depart below MZFW due fuel uplift. This limits QF's ability to carry freight direct NZL-LAX v v.
29 aerorobnz : At certain times of the year it struggles on the LAX-AKL sector when the sector time for all flights goes up with a prevailing headwind, and it has b
30 alangirvan : The Qantas A330-200s on AKL-LAX have 36J/199Y seats. The Jetstar A332s have 38Premium and 265 Standard seats. So the JQ A332s will have to carry 68 m
31 Airvan00 : Agreed that is the current situation. But there is no rule that JQ has to use the denser seating 332's. The QF and JQ aircraft can be interchangeable
32 ZK-NBT : I'm not sure I understand what you mean here? JQ's 332s have 303 seats, a similar number to QFs domestic birds. Whereas QFs International 332s have 2
33 Airvan00 : I was suggesting that if the QF group wanted to start ALK-SFO with JQ and the current JQ 332's were not suitable, we might see some QF 332's (the 36/
34 ZK-NBT : Ok. QF do only have 4 International A332s VH-EBG, EBH, EBI and EBL meaning that they require 3 of them for the current SYD-AKL-LAX-JFK rotation. So t
35 Airvan00 : Yes, this whole suggestion of JQ flying ALK-SFO is starting to sound a bit difficult. I suppose the ALK-LAX could revert back to a 744 as QF have anno
36 Post contains images kiwiandrew : Please note that using ALK instead of AKL for Auckland is nearly as serious a booboo as writing Quantas instead of Qantas. Once as a typo is fine , b
37 Post contains images Airvan00 : Sorry For some reason I have trouble with AKL and FRA. My mind always thinks of NZAA and EDDF and I have trouble translating when not thinking. I bee
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...
Rumor: QF To Start SYD - DFW - BNE/SYD posted Wed Jan 12 2011 07:29:02 by UnitedTristar
AA/BA To Start JFK-LHR Shuttle In April posted Wed Oct 6 2010 14:27:28 by MAH4546
AS To Start SJC/SMF-GDL In December! posted Thu Sep 16 2010 07:17:03 by Tomassjc
AI To Start MEL And SFO From DEL? posted Mon Jun 21 2010 09:17:46 by LAXDESI
CO To Start IAH-AKL - Part II posted Wed Jun 2 2010 20:14:59 by LipeGIG
CO To Start IAH-AKL posted Wed May 26 2010 09:15:28 by Web
TK To Start DAC And SGN In 2010 posted Wed Dec 16 2009 18:34:44 by TK787
Saudia Arabian To Start BLR,CCJ,LKO In India posted Tue Feb 24 2009 17:40:41 by Ojas
TAP To Start MOW, WAW, HEL In June 2009 posted Sun Nov 30 2008 05:14:32 by Airbazar
IT To Start BLR-LHR-SFO ; 9W To Cooperate posted Wed Oct 15 2008 09:17:16 by Ojas