EDICHC
Topic Author
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:38 pm

Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:54 pm

Since relocating here 6 months ago, I have wondered why no carrier operates AKL-MNL direct? Manila appears to be the only large SE Asian capital not served direct from NZ (pls correct me if I'm wrong)

My particular reason for this is that my wife is filipina and natually she has made many friends among the filipino community here and I think given the number of filipinos alone here in NZ would be able to support such a route.
A300/319/320/346 ATR72 B722/732/3/4/5/6/8/742/4/752/762/3/772/3 BAC111 BAe146 C172 DHC1/6/8 HS121 MD80 PA28
 
kiwiandrew

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:17 pm

3 reasons : yield , yield , yield . For the most part travel between the Phillipines and New Zealand is visiting friends and relatives and is more than adequately catered to by CX over HKG , SQ over SIN and QF over SYD
 
EDICHC
Topic Author
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:38 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:58 pm

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 1):



Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 1):
and is more than adequately catered to by CX over HKG , SQ over SIN and QF over SYD

I disagree about the adequately served bit. All of the services above involve either relativly high fares or really awkward transfers, for example when booking a forthcoming trip QF had me arriving in BNE at approx 0400 and out at 0900, SQ (my eventual choice) leaves me with an overnight in SIN. As for CX forget it! $400 more expensive. Incredibly the cheapest option was JAL via NRT!

By comparison my last trip to MNL originated in EDI a journey nearly 3,000 miles longer, and yet my total journey time for that trip was several hours less. I'm quite sure ither ANZ or PAL could do quite nicely with say a 3 times weekly frequency on the AKL-MNL route.
A300/319/320/346 ATR72 B722/732/3/4/5/6/8/742/4/752/762/3/772/3 BAC111 BAe146 C172 DHC1/6/8 HS121 MD80 PA28
 
kiwiandrew

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:11 pm

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 2):
I'm quite sure ither ANZ or PAL could do quite nicely with say a 3 times weekly frequency on the AKL-MNL route.

NZ have previously pretty much ruled out any service to Manila ( at a shareholders meeting a couple of years ago in response to a direct question from the floor ) . Bearing in mind that they have dropped both SIN / TPE and NGO recently I would say that they would have minimal interest . I seem to recall from friends at QF that MNL-SYD/BNE has a huge level of no-shows ( partly due to visa issues and partly due to people not having sufficient cash to pay the non ticketable departure fee at MNL ) and PR don't seem to have recovered from their network implosion of a few years ago .

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 2):
SQ (my eventual choice) leaves me with an overnight in SIN.

don't SQ have an overnight AKL-SIN on certain days of the week ? IIRC the whole raison d'etre for that flight was to permit morning connections over SIN to a host of ( mainly ) Asian destinations
 
kiwiandrew

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:16 pm

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 2):
By comparison my last trip to MNL originated in EDI a journey nearly 3,000 miles longer, and yet my total journey time for that trip was several hours less.

yes , but in that case you were looking at links between a continent of well over 300 million people and the Phillipines , New Zealand is an "end of the line" country of only 4 million people with little or no historic , tourist , or cultural links to the Phillipines - while I understand it would be more convenient for you if an AKL-MNL service existed ( just as a BRU-SIN-AKL or BRU-HKG-AKL direct flight would make my life a lot easier Big grin ) I don't like (y)our chances of convincing the beancounters at any airline to try any of those routes
 
N1120A
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:36 pm

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 2):
All of the services above involve either relativly high fares

I think the airlines like that.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
GneissGuy
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:42 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Tue Feb 13, 2007 8:38 pm

If there is money to be made, the airlines will be the first to jump on it.

This route is simply not economically sustainable.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4348
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:00 pm

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 2):
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 1):and is more than adequately catered to by CX over HKG , SQ over SIN and QF over SYD
I disagree about the adequately served bit. All of the services above involve either relativly high fares or really awkward transfers, for example when booking a forthcoming trip QF had me arriving in BNE at approx 0400 and out at 0900, SQ (my eventual choice) leaves me with an overnight in SIN. As for CX forget it! $400 more expensive. Incredibly the cheapest option was JAL via NRT!

It's "adequately" served for the amount of money to be made on the route, ie none and none! If the fares people were prepared to pay were suficently high enough to make money either NZ or PR or SJ, JQ, DJ (PolyBlue), FJ or even PX would be be in the market, the fact that none of them are means you are not prepared to pay enough money!

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
gardermoen
Posts: 1333
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 1999 9:52 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:12 pm

What about the Royal Brunei option?
They fly Auckland-Brisbane-Brunei three or four times a week.
Not sure if the Manila services have a short connection though.
 
EDICHC
Topic Author
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:38 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 8:06 am

Quoting Gardermoen (Reply 8):

Will look at that option next time thanks. But 2 changes & 3 stops aint too appealing.

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 4):

Fair point but I find it a liitle ironic that my last trip to MNL, which as I said originated in EDI (FRA-MNL) and let's face it Scotland could be described as "end of the line", was shorter (origin-dest time), more convenient, and cheaper. I doesn't seem to make sense, but then again who said anything in commercial aviation makes sense!  Big grin While there might not be the cultural links between the two countries, there is a quickly growing filipino community in NZ, particularly among health care professionals so the demographics are changing all the time.

Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 3):

Yeah but that would mean two changes AKL, SIN

The one adavntage of SQ is that I can go CHC-SIN direct, down side is that there is no evening connection in SIN for MNL
A300/319/320/346 ATR72 B722/732/3/4/5/6/8/742/4/752/762/3/772/3 BAC111 BAe146 C172 DHC1/6/8 HS121 MD80 PA28
 
6thfreedom
Posts: 2622
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 11:09 am

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 1:11 pm

Or get a cheapy one-way across the Tasman, then book on PR.

To make it a one stop, fly from new zealand into SYD to connect or PR around 11am, and on the way back get off in MEL, and connect trans-tasman again.

1 stop services each way... and PR are normally price leaders!
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2303
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 1:34 pm

the problem is Business Traffic. There's none!
And manila is a city, not a beach tourist resort so its got to compete with
the likes of Bali and Phuket from Australia.... which obviously isn't easy.

Put it this way. The only people who are likely to be full business class fare paying
passengers on the existing Qantas flight, is Rose Hancock and Friends going back to
show off the gold mine they own, or when Imelda Marcos decides Sydney is her next shopping
destination. (and brings her staff with her too of course) Other then that, forget it.

Now thats the case for Australia... with 20 million people. So How on earth is NZ going to do it?
Also, visiting friends and relatives traffic is usually quite low yeilding... but this route market is particularly low.
Look at the jobs most of them do? They're not exactly typically working in high paid roles. How many of this lot
are housemaids or similar type work? That's not to say that they're aren't doctors etc, or that filipino's aren't capable, but
a groups wealth (or a subgroup) will largely dictate if company's bother throw their efforts at it.

Think of it like this. JAL maintains service to South America. Why? Lots of Japanese expats who, relative to the rest of the community, are quite wealthy, and coff up big for those expensive business and first class airfares...where the money i to be made.

Remember part of the beauty of New Zealand is due to its location, which isn't exactly in the centre of things. Do you think that same lifestyle would be there if NZ was located say, where Singapore is? Or would there be 100 million people living there and high rises all over the south island? It's the price you pay for that lifestyle my friend.
Anyway if you think thats bad you should see how much Qantas charge me for a business class flight to JFK.
 
EDICHC
Topic Author
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:38 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 3:45 pm

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 11):



Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 11):
They're not exactly typically working in high paid roles. How many of this lot
are housemaids or similar type work? That's not to say that they're aren't doctors etc, or that filipino's aren't capable, but
a groups wealth (or a subgroup) will largely dictate if company's bother throw their efforts at it.

Well for your information LH my wife who is filipina is an RN as I am. Most of the filipino community here are, as I previously stated healthcare professionals (MD's RN's Physiotherapists etc). Is that whom you are referring to when you refer to "this lot"? I find that description patronising and insulting.

Not that I would ever wish any kind of misfortune on anyone, but if you should be unfortunate enough to suffer some kind of accident or malady it may be that one of "this lot" could well be responsible for your treatment!

Business traffic-none? How sure are you of that? Last time I flew into MNL it was with LH and Business Class looked pretty full....and guess what? They were mostly filipino! Wonder how all those FRA based housemaids could afford that?

[Edited 2007-02-14 08:09:27]
A300/319/320/346 ATR72 B722/732/3/4/5/6/8/742/4/752/762/3/772/3 BAC111 BAe146 C172 DHC1/6/8 HS121 MD80 PA28
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2303
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:04 pm

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 12):
Is that whom you are referring to when you refer to "this lot"? I find that description patronising and insulting.

Yes you would and i'm not surprised. But the sad reality is the average wealth of an individual of that background isn't great. India is no different. You get brilliant indians, and some extremely wealthy ones, but by and large, the country is poor. India's sheer size and its ability to export low cost professional labour is the only reason Qantas has a flight to india.... i might note that air india doesn't bother serve Australia. And there is a billion people there. So what chance does manila and NZ have?

It in no way comments on your abiliy nor was it intended to. But if you're going to refuse to admit that there are lots of people from the philippines that aren't all that wealthy and aren't employed in exactly lucrative jobs, well that's your problem... but until they can start coughing up the money IN NUMBERS BIG ENOUGH to fill up a 767... well forget it. Do you know how much it costs to fly a 767 for just an hour? Let alone 8 hrs? Now to make a service viable you really need at least 3 services a week (and that's not great, some airlines have a daily or nothing policy unless the service attracts a very large premium - ie mining flights or oil flights). Now how many poeple live in New Zealand? Now how many of those people are from the philippines? Now of that, how many of those people are employed in professional type roles and thus have the disposible income to spend on business class airfares of at least NZ $5000 return (and thats needed to make a flight profitable unless you want to start charging each economy passenger about $1600 return NZD. ) What.... 10 000 people at most in the whole of new zealand? not even close i bet. Yep... Also i might point out that much of NZ's traffic is dominated and viable thanks to INCOMING TRAFFIC rather then New Zealand based passengers... with a few Australian and UK routes being the exception and even that varies depending on the time of the year. All Im talking here is facts and numbers and nothing to do with race.

if you read my post more carefully you'd realise that I actually made an allowence for professional persons such as yourself... the trouble is that's just not enough in numbers. Look there is no need to take it personally... its not ment as a personal attack, but its the same reason there are Arabs flying around in 747s full of gold taps and diamond tipped toilet brushes... the money's there thats all.

[Edited 2007-02-14 08:15:17]
 
EDICHC
Topic Author
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:38 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:20 pm

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 13):



Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 13):
to make a flight profitable unless you want to start charging each economy passenger about $1600

Er! Current cheapest avail economy return to MNL is $1,960 (i know because I've just booked it!) so that would be a nice improvement!

I did not take your remarks personally, as I am not filipino. I objected to your description and stereotyping based on race.
A300/319/320/346 ATR72 B722/732/3/4/5/6/8/742/4/752/762/3/772/3 BAC111 BAe146 C172 DHC1/6/8 HS121 MD80 PA28
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2303
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:31 pm

opps my bad, i ment about 1600 each way NZ.

if you have 30 in business each paying 5000 (in reality its prob gonna be slightly higher then that...premium for direct service) thats 150 000 extra revenue. So if you just break even on ur economy pax after you've got that kind of load...you can make a profit.

I stand by my comments too. They're not based on race, but rather on poverty. BTW, you're probably assuming that with a name like Lufthansa, I'm 6'4, blonde hair and blue eyes right? Think again.
 
kiwiandrew

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:06 pm

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 9):
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 3):


Yeah but that would mean two changes AKL, SIN

The one adavntage of SQ is that I can go CHC-SIN direct, down side is that there is no evening connection in SIN for MNL

my apologies , I forgot you are in CHC - I am speaking as a typical (ex) JAFA

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 9):
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 4):


Fair point but I find it a liitle ironic that my last trip to MNL, which as I said originated in EDI (FRA-MNL) and let's face it Scotland could be described as "end of the line", was shorter (origin-dest time), more convenient, and cheaper. I doesn't seem to make sense, but then again who said anything in commercial aviation makes sense! While there might not be the cultural links between the two countries, there is a quickly growing filipino community in NZ, particularly among health care professionals so the demographics are changing all the time.

Yes , but it wasn't an EDI-MNL direct flight , was it ? You have a huge range of options because it is not just the population of Scotland ( only a little more after all than the population of New Zealand ) filling that flight , it is the population of a continent of more than 300 million people - so you have options connecting over FRA , AMS and who knows where else - what have you got between NZ ( population approx 4 million ) and the Phillipines ? Papua New Guinea , Australia , New Caledonia and that is why you are stuck with such a dearth of connecting opportunities , perhaps the demographic change in New Zealands population may make this a viable route at some time in the long term . May I ask you , since you have contacts in the Filipino community , do you have an idea of approx how many Filipinos actually live in New Zealand ?
 
macilree
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 12:13 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:12 pm

As yet there is no air services agreement between New Zealand and the Philippines but note the brief reference in this 15 January 2007 New Zealand Herald article reporting on the recent meeting between President Arroyo and the NZ Prime Minister.

As the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade notes, New Zealand and the Philippines have already held two rounds of air services negotiations. The Philippines is now the only APEC economy with which New Zealand does not have a negotiated air services agreement. It is now also the largest passenger market for New Zealand that does not have such an agreement.

Of course if an air services agreement is negotiated, although it would create the opportunities for airlines from the Philippines and New Zealand to serve the market, it does not necessarily follow that they will decide to either operate or code share.

John Macilree's Weblog
John Macilree
 
flyjetstar
Posts: 680
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:37 am

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:12 pm

I travel to Manila every year and its true its not the easiest place to get to but if you shop around you can usually get some good deals. I paid $1300 last year on SQ and its been at that level for quite a few years now. You have to have access to the cash as these are special fares and need to be paid at time of booking.

CX do have some good fares at times and do offer good connections, possibly the best even if you arrive late at night, from NZ - AKL/CHC to MNL.
 
flyjetstar
Posts: 680
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:37 am

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:17 pm

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 14):
Er! Current cheapest avail economy return to MNL is $1,960 (i know because I've just booked it!) so that would be a nice improvement!

When are you traveling? Unless its soon why didn't you wait for special fares? They are fairly frequent to Manila on a range of airlines.
 
cchan
Posts: 952
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 8:54 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:32 pm

Quoting EDICHC (Thread starter):
Manila appears to be the only large SE Asian capital not served direct from NZ (pls correct me if I'm wrong)

The other is Vietnam, and Indonesian flights were just dropped. What is the chances of VN extending their Australia services to AKL? SGN is a very nice place to stopover!

For MNL, not only there are insufficient number of Filippinos in NZ to fill the planes, there are only very few tourists.
 
6thfreedom
Posts: 2622
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 11:09 am

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:44 pm

Quoting Cchan (Reply 20):
The other is Vietnam, and Indonesian flights were just dropped. What is the chances of VN extending their Australia services to AKL? SGN is a very nice place to stopover!

Highly unlikely to extend to AKL, as the current cycle means that only one aircraft is required for each turnaround to MEL/SYD. VN is now battling JQ over SYD, so i cant see them stretching it to AKL.

Also worth noting that all pax require a visa, even if transitting in Vietnam.
A pain in the a$$ going through the process, which is why many Australians still avoid VN's lead in fares of $1290 + tax to europe. If Vietnam allowed free transit visas, I think it could turn the country into a favourable stopover point.

RE: CHC-MNL... the other option is to get a Y fare through to KUL or SIN, and pick up one of the LCCs from there.
 
macilree
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 12:13 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:55 pm

Quoting Cchan (Reply 20):
For MNL, not only there are insufficient number of Filippinos in NZ to fill the planes, there are only very few tourists.

Time for some facts?

The 2006 New Zealand Census records 16,938 people who give their ethnicity as Filipino - the spreadsheet is available here

The recently released New Zealand migration statistics for the year ended December 2006 record New Zealand resident short-term departures where the main country of destination is the Philippines as 6,960 and overseas visitor arrivals from the Philippines as 7,059. In addition long-term migration in the same period from the Philippines to New Zealand totalled 2,533 people with 134 heading in the reverse direction - the spreadsheet is available here

John Macilree's Weblog
John Macilree
 
EDICHC
Topic Author
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:38 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:00 pm

Quoting Flyjetstar (Reply 19):
When are you traveling? Unless its soon why didn't you wait for special fares? They are fairly frequent to Manila on a range of airlines.

Fly out 7th April rtn 30th April.

Being Scottish I always look out for specials!  laughing 
A300/319/320/346 ATR72 B722/732/3/4/5/6/8/742/4/752/762/3/772/3 BAC111 BAe146 C172 DHC1/6/8 HS121 MD80 PA28
 
kiwiandrew

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:09 pm

Quoting Macilree (Reply 22):
The recently released New Zealand migration statistics for the year ended December 2006 record New Zealand resident short-term departures where the main country of destination is the Philippines as 6,960 and overseas visitor arrivals from the Philippines as 7,059. In addition long-term migration in the same period from the Philippines to New Zealand totalled 2,533 people with 134 heading in the reverse direction - the spreadsheet is available here

less than 150 people per week in each direction for short term visitors , for long term migrants about 50 incoming per week and 3 outgoing per week - I think we have our answer why there are no direct airlinks between New Zealand and the Phillipines
 
cchan
Posts: 952
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 8:54 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:22 pm

Assuming all tourists go on direct services

Quoting Macilree (Reply 22):
New Zealand resident short-term departures where the main country of destination is the Philippines as 6,960

This fills 29x B767 (234 seats)

Quoting Macilree (Reply 22):
overseas visitor arrivals from the Philippines as 7,059

This fills 30x B767

Quoting Macilree (Reply 22):
In addition long-term migration in the same period from the Philippines to New Zealand totalled 2,533 people with 134 heading in the reverse direction

This fills 11x B767


Then if we assume one third of the Filipino population in NZ make a trip to MNL each year

Quoting Macilree (Reply 22):
The 2006 New Zealand Census records 16,938 people who give their ethnicity as Filipino

This will fill 24x B767 return

If an airline operates a B767 three times a week, that will be 156 return flights, and only 94 out of the 156 flights will be filled, so most flights operates 60% full on average at best! Is this a viable service?!
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4348
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:33 pm

Quoting Cchan (Reply 25):
If an airline operates a B767 three times a week, that will be 156 return flights, and only 94 out of the 156 flights will be filled, so most flights operates 60% full on average at best! Is this a viable service?!

Depends on the fares that the airline can charge that number of people. If all the Y pax were paying full Y fare (very unlikely) and all bussiness class pax are paying full buss class fares(more likely, but probably not) then it probably would be viable.

In the real world load factors of around 75 to 90% seem necessary on MOST routes for profitable operation.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
EDICHC
Topic Author
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:38 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:36 pm

Quoting Cchan (Reply 25):
Then if we assume one third of the Filipino population in NZ make a trip to MNL each year

Quoting Macilree (Reply 22):
The 2006 New Zealand Census records 16,938 people who give their ethnicity as Filipino

This will fill 24x B767 return

If an airline operates a B767 three times a week, that will be 156 return flights, and only 94 out of the 156 flights will be filled, so most flights operates 60% full on average at best! Is this a viable service?!

The vast majority (c80-90%) of filipinos I know here in CHC travel to MNL annually. If you include say 50% of those who have a spouse/partner travelling who is not filipino (like myself) then that raises the figures a bit. Not only that but around the time my wife & I arrived to settle here, the NZ PM was visiting the Philippines as part of an initiative to encourage more filipino health professionsals to relocate in NZ. This is heading a little off-topic but surely a direct air link between the two countries would boost this initiative
A300/319/320/346 ATR72 B722/732/3/4/5/6/8/742/4/752/762/3/772/3 BAC111 BAe146 C172 DHC1/6/8 HS121 MD80 PA28
 
cchan
Posts: 952
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 8:54 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:43 pm

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 27):
The vast majority (c80-90%) of filipinos I know here in CHC travel to MNL annually. If you include say 50% of those who have a spouse/partner travelling who is not filipino (like myself) then that raises the figures a bit.

In reality, not all people flying between NZ and the Philippines will be using a direct service (often more expensive), so why would any airline take the risk in starting up a route that can only break even or earn small profit at best? It is better to put the bid elsewhere. Airlines are businesses that need to earn a profit!
 
kiwiandrew

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:44 pm

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 27):
If you include say 50% of those who have a spouse/partner travelling who is not filipino (like myself) then that raises the figures a bit. Not only that but around the time my wife & I arrived to settle here, the NZ PM was visiting the Philippines as part of an initiative to encourage more filipino health professionsals to relocate in NZ. This is heading a little off-topic but surely a direct air link between the two countries would boost this initiative

but then you get in to a 'chicken and egg' situation , maybe with a larger Filipino resident population air links would be viable , maybe with a direct air link there would be a larger Filipino resident population - the point remains that based on the figures quoted by other posters ( which assume that all travellers would use direct flights rather than hunting around for the best price - in my experience of seven years in the travel industry a very unlikely proposition ) the flights would either be completely unviable , or at best ,marginal - even with fuel starting to drop in price I don't think you will find many airline route planners willing to gamble their jobs on this one - sorry
 
EDICHC
Topic Author
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:38 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 7:14 pm

Well looks like I will be getting quite familiar with SIN in the next few years! But what the hell maybe, just maybe, this debate may be read by someone in the industry...you never know?
A300/319/320/346 ATR72 B722/732/3/4/5/6/8/742/4/752/762/3/772/3 BAC111 BAe146 C172 DHC1/6/8 HS121 MD80 PA28
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4348
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 7:19 pm

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 27):
This is heading a little off-topic but surely a direct air link between the two countries would boost this initiative

Sure, but who is going to pay for it in the mean time until it becomes profitable in its own right? Not the airline!

Its true than any business has to start somewhere and survive the first lean years, but their has to be an incentive to take the risk, which is usually much higher profits in later years. Does not seem likely in this case.

As a bye the bye did you know that "The Australian" Oz's only daily national paper took 21 YEARS to turn in its first profit! I belive it is now quite profitable but it was only allowed to survive that long to reach profitability because it was such a tiny, tiny part of News Ltd's business AND the major share holder was determined to prove his critics wrong!

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3246
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 7:27 pm

QF, CX, SQ, MH, TG, GA and BI are the main reasons why there are no direct (or non-stop) flights between MNL and AKL. This coupled with the fact that PR and NZ have no alliance and/or code-sharing agreements. And finally, MNL is not a hub for Kiwis to connect on to other points in Asia, Europe and so forth from (when compared to regional competitors SIN, KUL, BKK and HKG).

It's also hard to be profitable when most of the traffic is leisure.

Regards
MH

[Edited 2007-02-14 11:29:07]
come visit the south pacific
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 3713
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 7:45 pm

There just isn't the market for it... there are very few historical or contemporary links between Phillipeans and New Zealand. New Zealand has only a small Filipino community and the Phillipeans has even less New Zealanders living there!There is very little business market, and little in the way of high yield leisure travellers, mostly just the friends and relatives travellers which aren't usually paying enough to sustain a service especially one that doesn't have many business pax.
Maybe an Island hopping service with A320/737 via say NAN or something might be an option for say FJ or a Phillipeans airline.
Service via Australia is the most likely option... BNE or to a lesser degree CNS being the most likely ports.
56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
Lufthansa
Posts: 2303
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 6:04 am

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 7:51 pm

There is only one airline that could possibly do it... and they won't for 2 reasons. Firstly they have a shortage of widebody aircraft, (read not wasting out time deploying on low revenue routes), and second, they don't have the legal right to fly the route. Which airline is that? Qantas.

Qantas already flys the 767 to both ports. Meaning a whole stack of economies of scale are already gained. This flight MUST be on a 767, anything else is too big, and anything smaller simply won't make it with a full payload in all weather conditions.

Okay reasons why:

Firstly, QF already have established bases in MNL and AKL. There is a lot in this. Consider this. Fuel upload prices, ground handelling, layover for staff (the longer they're away they're getting paid and not working), hotel prices for staff, catering prices, local marketing efforts etc. All of these things are real and cost money and all of them or most of them come at significant discounts when you purchase them in bulk. Everything from Ground support, to toilet paper, to cabin crew shuttle buses etc... it is all a real cost and that is the reason many airlines take the attitude if they can't serve it daily they don't wanna do it.

Qantas is the only airline that already is established at both bases, that could on a mere one or twice per week basis, send an aircraft say syd/mel/bne -akl-mnl and back and not have to worry to much about the effect on their system. however for it to work, they'd need to suck up pretty much ALL the market (a big ask at any time) and even then they'd get a rather average return at best (and that's putting it nicely)... AND... they'd need the NZ and Philippine gov to change existing laws and give QF 5th freedom rights.... something which just aint gonna happen.

NZ or PR would have to invest significantly at the other end to make it work...and in PR's case, they'd need to introduce a new type of aircraft (HUGE INVESTMENT...not gonna happen) because they don't currently have anything suitable, with the airbus A330 being way way too big.

[Edited 2007-02-14 12:10:46]
 
kiwiandrew

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Wed Feb 14, 2007 7:54 pm

Quoting Lufthansa (Reply 34):
AND... they'd need the NZ and Philippine gov to change existing laws and give QF 5th freedom rights....

I am not sure that QF would need the NZ govt to change anything - I think that the air services agreement between New Zealand and Australia is pretty liberal , but I do agree that it is pretty unlikely to happen
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4348
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Thu Feb 15, 2007 4:31 pm

Hey EDICHC

I've been thinking about your remarks in the thread starter and in replies 2, 9, 12, 14, & 27 as they seemed a little odd, although oddly familiar in some ways. Thinking about it some more I recognised the "gut feel" or underlying attitude of your remarks was similar to some of my ex wife's family from England & Scotland, when touring this country.
Particularly those in reply where you compare the EDI-MNL trip to the AKL-MNL trip and what it is is perspective of the situation.

This IS NOT a criticism, but I have noticed that Europeans (and to a lesser extent Americans) have FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW, an "odd" perspective on distance and travel. So as an aid in understanding the OZ/Kiwi pov on this I have prepared two maps at Karls Great Circle Mapper. Click on the links below, don't copy and paste as the whole URL is not shown. (They are so long so all the parameters are in the url, that way you don't have to save files.)

The first URL shows range circles of 500, 1000 & 1500 nm around EDI. If you look at this you see that 500 nm around EDI covers all of the UK & Ireland, the southern (populated) parts of Norway & Sweden, Denmark, the Benalux, northern Germany south almost to FRA and northern France, south to about Paris. How many people and how much GDP is generated in this area? I don't have the exact numbers but it must be about 2-3 hundred million people and 15-20% of the planets GDP.

Now look at the second url, it shows the range circles around CHC. At 500nm you have NZ, thats it. Population 4-5 million, about a .5% of global GDP? Which is pretty good for .08% of the population. But almost zero compared to that in the same distance around EDI.

Now look at the 1000 nm circle, from EDI you now cover most of Europe from just north of LIS to just west of LED, from Iceland to Pisa. How many people? 500 million?? Now do the same at CHC. You have gained about 850 people, the population of Norfolk & Lord Howe Islands, thats it!

When you look at in from that perspective its no wonder its easier and cheaper from EDI to MNL than from CHC to MNL!

Just for fun I added the 1500 nm circle. Around EDI it now covers from the WEST coast of Greenland to the Urals, to Turkey and North Africa. Total population must have hit 1 Billion! Doing the same around CHC and you now include SE Australia from BNE to ADL about 15 million to add to NZs to total about 20 million!

URL 1 based on EDI:
http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=e...E=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=

URL 2 based on CHC:
http://gc.kls2.com/cgi-bin/gc?PATH=c...E=best&RANGE-COLOR=navy&MAP-STYLE=


Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
cchan
Posts: 952
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 8:54 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Thu Feb 15, 2007 4:55 pm

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 30):
But what the hell maybe, just maybe, this debate may be read by someone in the industry...you never know?

This debate only suggest to them that the route planners at NZ and PR have made the right decision not to start AKL-MNL.
 
EDICHC
Topic Author
Posts: 1545
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:38 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Thu Feb 15, 2007 5:42 pm

Quoting Cchan (Reply 37):
Quoting EDICHC (Reply 30):
But what the hell maybe, just maybe, this debate may be read by someone in the industry...you never know?

This debate only suggest to them that the route planners at NZ and PR have made the right decision not to start AKL-MNL.

Thanks Cchan! Crush a guy's hopes why dont you!  laughing 
A300/319/320/346 ATR72 B722/732/3/4/5/6/8/742/4/752/762/3/772/3 BAC111 BAe146 C172 DHC1/6/8 HS121 MD80 PA28
 
cchan
Posts: 952
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 8:54 pm

RE: Why No Direct AKL-MNL?

Thu Feb 15, 2007 8:20 pm

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 38):
Thanks Cchan! Crush a guy's hopes why dont you!

There are "rumours" that NZ management does look into this forum!