I read you post and I understand that you have a good understanding about aviation but your comment, ’However, its unfair for you to determine the exact causes and how "profitable" flights are’
can be thrown right back at you. In my analysis of the situation I was simply stating facts already presented by the airline as well as considering some market trends.
Now please don’t forget that in my previous posts I have already mentioned several times that I doubt a LAX
route would be viable especially with the current world affairs. My arguments here are hypothetical and assume better market conditions in the future.
Now as for the options you presented for getting from AMM to LAX
, they seem to be inaccurate as flying the YUL
sector would be with another airline (not MS
) which would increase the fare.
As for yields, you seem to be basing it on a reduced economy airfare, which is hardly a basis when considering overall profitability/yields. Premium airfares (F and Y tickets) are considered the ‘bread and butter’ of an airline so you cannot ignore them.
Besides as I have pointed out before, such a flight would cater for the LAX
-Egypt market (O&D traffic), and any connecting passengers would not be as significant (though still important)
As for premium class travellers, it is not as clear-cut as you made it. Indeed frequency and timing are important but you have to remember businesses are more cost conscience now (then say 10 years ago) so they’re willing to make sacrifices. For example; many send their employees travelling at the ‘back of the tube’ to save money, which can indirectly be associated with the demise of First class with many world-class airlines (and to a lesser extent the success of LCCs). My point is, if the price and service levels are right then a business traveller would not mind an extra few hours of travel. Having said that I am not saying that Egyptair won’t be at a competitive disadvantage because they would be, but they will make it up in other ways.
As for Egyptair not sending ‘valuable’ 777s (or any wide-body) on 3x weekly outings, just look at JNB
(2x weekly), BKK
(2x weekly), NRT
(3x weekly) or Osaka (3x weekly). Now yes frequency is important, but if the market is not big enough to warrant say a daily service, then it would be uneconomical of an airline to do so. I agree that a twice-weekly flight would not attract business clients, but I think 3x weekly can just about attract them.
Regarding it being a non-stop or a 1 stop service, I am sure a LAX
service would be with a stop at least until a market grows to sustain non-stop (MS have always launched North American destinations with a stop until it develops and upgrading it to non-stop later). Yes that extra stop will make BA
/AF/LH services more attractive, but MS
will on the other hand make provisions to make the service appealing (price, service, bigger M.E/African network, etc).
You pointed out that YUL
has the ‘same VFR market dynamics as LAX
’ but with closer relations to CAI. Now I can see why you would say that but it can also be argued that YUL
eventually became a non-stop service (at least during summer) not only due to the increase in the O&D market, but also for ease of travel for the large number of connecting passengers. That could be the same with LAX
, where it could progress from 1-stop to non-stop, but connecting passengers would still use its 1-stop service.
As for passenger numbers on the YUL
-CAI route being lower in the winter then YUL
-CAI (for the summer), well that is down to seasonal changes in demand. The large Egyptian community in YUL
return back home in the summer as well as Canadian travellers holidaying in Egypt. The fact the service become 1-stop in the winter is associated more to the drop in seasonal demand, rather than a drop because the flights become 1-stop.
And as I said in my previous post LAX
was terminated after 9/11 because the global drop in passenger numbers and not because the service was 1-stop to CAI. The airline had been operating CAI-JFK
for nearly 10 years profitably. Had it been at a lose during that period (excluding pre 9/11) then the airline would have axed it before.
It’s obvious that we have very different opinions about this matter, and I hope you can respect mine…I guess we just have to agree on disagreeing.
p.s. I noticed in another thread that AC
's plan to serve BEY
and Tehran have re-surfaced. Do you think they will ever take off? Any news on AC