• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 10
 
User avatar
vhtje
Posts: 815
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:40 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:13 am

a7ala wrote:
What big j markets was qf missing out on outside of akl wlg chc zqn? I'm guessing 80% of new Zealand's population is within a couple of hours drive from these 4 airports.

Where's the upside for qf (the nz upside is far more obvious) particularly given they already have a player in the domestic nz market?


Frequency? A Business Class option?
I only turn left when boarding aircraft. Well, mostly. All right, sometimes. OH OKAY - rarely.
 
a320fan
Posts: 645
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:04 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:23 am

a7ala wrote:
moa999 wrote:
a7ala wrote:
I wonder what this means for jetstar in new Zealand?


I suspect nothing. It serves its purpose and has nowhere near as many routes as NZ, and the LCCs aren't setup for connections.

I'm sure most people paying for QF over the Tasman (particularly in J weren't thrilled about going into JQ)


Do you think its a good strategy to help fill the planes of your competitor against your own subsidary?

What big j markets was qf missing out on outside of akl wlg chc zqn? I'm guessing 80% of new Zealand's population is within a couple of hours drive from these 4 airports.

Where's the upside for qf (the nz upside is far more obvious) particularly given they already have a player in the domestic nz market?


Upside for QF is taking the NZ loyal kiwis who probably wouldn’t touch JQ with a barge pole away from VA when they travel onwards domestically in Australia.
A319, A320, A321, A330-200, A380, 737-700, 737-800, 777-200ER, 777-300, 777-300ER, 787-8, Q300
 
SYDSpotter
Posts: 716
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:10 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:34 am

a7ala wrote:

Where's the upside for qf (the nz upside is far more obvious) particularly given they already have a player in the domestic nz market?


Quote from the AusBT article:

"The alliance will see Qantas stamp its QF code onto 30 domestic AirNZ services across New Zealand, while the Kiwi carrier will in turn plant its NZ prefix on 85 domestic Qantas flight in Australia."

JQ's domestic NZ network is fairly limited compared with NZ, so I doubt there's a lot of cannibalisation. Ultimately both QF and NZ fly to the major population centres in AUS/NZ on their own metal, so the codeshares aren't exactly going to generate any significant incremental revenue opportunities for either QF or NZ. This arrangement makes things more convenient for a handful of flyers who would need to connect onto regional flights. The codeshare is more a slap in the face for VA rather than being any death knell for VA on trans-Tasman flying.
319_320_321_332_333_388 / 734_737_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W_789
 
getluv
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:41 am

Qantas16 wrote:
getluv wrote:
SYDSpotter wrote:

If QF's claims are correct, I shudder to think what landing fees CBR is charging QR :lol: :lol: :lol:


I think CBR and the ACT Government would be subsidising quite a percentage of QR's costs just so they can be on a map.


I don't know about that... QR needs CBR more than CBR needs QR.


Soon as Australia expands its bilateral with Qatar, QR will drop CBR like a lead balloon.
You meant lose, not loose.
 
getluv
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:49 am

SYDSpotter wrote:
a7ala wrote:

Where's the upside for qf (the nz upside is far more obvious) particularly given they already have a player in the domestic nz market?


Quote from the AusBT article:

"The alliance will see Qantas stamp its QF code onto 30 domestic AirNZ services across New Zealand, while the Kiwi carrier will in turn plant its NZ prefix on 85 domestic Qantas flight in Australia."

JQ's domestic NZ network is fairly limited compared with NZ, so I doubt there's a lot of cannibalisation. Ultimately both QF and NZ fly to the major population centres in AUS/NZ on their own metal, so the codeshares aren't exactly going to generate any significant incremental revenue opportunities for either QF or NZ. This arrangement makes things more convenient for a handful of flyers who would need to connect onto regional flights. The codeshare is more a slap in the face for VA rather than being any death knell for VA on trans-Tasman flying.


You're downplaying things here a little. Half of VA international traffic is derived to/from NZ. I would argue feed here is the most important thing especially on VA's own domestic network.
You meant lose, not loose.
 
redroo
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:28 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:21 am

Re QF NZ. I wasn’t expecting this but it is a shrewd move on both airlines parts, and yes it is a slap in the face to Borghetti.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 6494
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:28 am

The first QF A332 with WIFI VH-EBB returned to service today
Forum Moderator
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1480
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 1:53 pm

getluv wrote:
Qantas16 wrote:
getluv wrote:


QR won’t drop CBR until it is entitled to at least 35 weekly frequencies. Going from 21 up to 28 would only see QR add BNE; CBR will stay until they can operate twice daily at SYD without the tag.
 
User avatar
vhqpa
Posts: 1467
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:21 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:19 pm

vhtje wrote:
a7ala wrote:
What big j markets was qf missing out on outside of akl wlg chc zqn? I'm guessing 80% of new Zealand's population is within a couple of hours drive from these 4 airports.

Where's the upside for qf (the nz upside is far more obvious) particularly given they already have a player in the domestic nz market?


Frequency? A Business Class option?


NZ hasn't had a domestic J product for several years. Frequency is a big difference though. Last December (on a saturday) I flew WLG-CHC. JQ only had a morning and late evening flight both on 320 equipment. On the other hand NZ maintained an hourly shuttle mainly with ATR72 but at least one 320 in there. Booking three months in advance most NZ flights were still priced around NZ$68 for Seat+Bag. I took the NZ option and even late morning it was full.

If anything next time I visit WLG I'd probably be more likely to take QF/NZ BNE-AKL-WLG than nonstop options on NZ/VA.
"There you go ladies and gentleman we're through Mach 1 the speed of sound no bumps no bangs... CONCORDE"
 
zkncj
Posts: 2978
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 6:39 pm

getluv wrote:
SYDSpotter wrote:
a7ala wrote:

Where's the upside for qf (the nz upside is far more obvious) particularly given they already have a player in the domestic nz market?


Quote from the AusBT article:

"The alliance will see Qantas stamp its QF code onto 30 domestic AirNZ services across New Zealand, while the Kiwi carrier will in turn plant its NZ prefix on 85 domestic Qantas flight in Australia."

JQ's domestic NZ network is fairly limited compared with NZ, so I doubt there's a lot of cannibalisation. Ultimately both QF and NZ fly to the major population centres in AUS/NZ on their own metal, so the codeshares aren't exactly going to generate any significant incremental revenue opportunities for either QF or NZ. This arrangement makes things more convenient for a handful of flyers who would need to connect onto regional flights. The codeshare is more a slap in the face for VA rather than being any death knell for VA on trans-Tasman flying.




You're downplaying things here a little. Half of VA international traffic is derived to/from NZ. I would argue feed here is the most important thing especially on VA's own domestic network.



As it hadn’t already been reported earlier this year 75% of VA’s Tasman passengers we’re booked via NZ. And they have now lost every single passenger that is now connecting onto an regional desntstion.
 
User avatar
Velocity7
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2018 7:49 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:07 pm

SYDSpotter wrote:
a7ala wrote:

Where's the upside for qf (the nz upside is far more obvious) particularly given they already have a player in the domestic nz market?


Quote from the AusBT article:

"The alliance will see Qantas stamp its QF code onto 30 domestic AirNZ services across New Zealand, while the Kiwi carrier will in turn plant its NZ prefix on 85 domestic Qantas flight in Australia."

JQ's domestic NZ network is fairly limited compared with NZ, so I doubt there's a lot of cannibalisation. Ultimately both QF and NZ fly to the major population centres in AUS/NZ on their own metal, so the codeshares aren't exactly going to generate any significant incremental revenue opportunities for either QF or NZ. This arrangement makes things more convenient for a handful of flyers who would need to connect onto regional flights. The codeshare is more a slap in the face for VA rather than being any death knell for VA on trans-Tasman flying.


I have been thinking along the same lines. Is the sizzle better than the sausage here?

NZ run pretty deep into Australian capital cities and some of the larger regional centres like OOL, MCY, CNS etc (understand some are seasonal) which I would have thought is where ~98% of people want to go. Is there really that much connecting traffic to places that they don't already serve on their own metal or hopping between Australian cities?

I can see the benefit of this code share arrangement on an AKL-BNE-MKY routing for example but it and similar sized centres, must be a tiny proportion of the travelling demand?
If the code share was on trans Tasman, that's a whole different story but this isn't - it is purely domestic and I just can't see this huge upside for QF?
The 'message' that it sends from a marketing perspective is gold but I feel the reality is somewhat different.
 
redroo
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:28 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:24 pm

Velocity7 wrote:
SYDSpotter wrote:
a7ala wrote:

Where's the upside for qf (the nz upside is far more obvious) particularly given they already have a player in the domestic nz market?


Quote from the AusBT article:

"The alliance will see Qantas stamp its QF code onto 30 domestic AirNZ services across New Zealand, while the Kiwi carrier will in turn plant its NZ prefix on 85 domestic Qantas flight in Australia."

JQ's domestic NZ network is fairly limited compared with NZ, so I doubt there's a lot of cannibalisation. Ultimately both QF and NZ fly to the major population centres in AUS/NZ on their own metal, so the codeshares aren't exactly going to generate any significant incremental revenue opportunities for either QF or NZ. This arrangement makes things more convenient for a handful of flyers who would need to connect onto regional flights. The codeshare is more a slap in the face for VA rather than being any death knell for VA on trans-Tasman flying.


I have been thinking along the same lines. Is the sizzle better than the sausage here?

NZ run pretty deep into Australian capital cities and some of the larger regional centres like OOL, MCY, CNS etc (understand some are seasonal) which I would have thought is where ~98% of people want to go. Is there really that much connecting traffic to places that they don't already serve on their own metal or hopping between Australian cities?

I can see the benefit of this code share arrangement on an AKL-BNE-MKY routing for example but it and similar sized centres, must be a tiny proportion of the travelling demand?
If the code share was on trans Tasman, that's a whole different story but this isn't - it is purely domestic and I just can't see this huge upside for QF?
The 'message' that it sends from a marketing perspective is gold but I feel the reality is somewhat different.



Whats the upside? Is this going to make either carrier millions of dollars? Not a chance. What it will do is enable people travelling on business to Sydney and Melbourne to do AKL-SYD-MEL-AKL in one trip on one ticket. The same goes for QF people to do SYD-AKL-WLG-SYD on one ticket or from MEL. This will keep the corporates and the frequent flier base happy on either side of the ditch.

Being able to connect from AKL-SYD onto regional Australia? Yeah its nice, but its not the be all and end all considering almost everyone lives in the capital cities. It will be useful for the mining crowd in WA and QLD, but we're not going to see a rush of people flying from AKL-SYD-ABX.

Given how closely connected the two countries are, and how small both carriers are in the grand scheme of things, the whole thing sort of makes sense.

The optics are gold as well. Oh to be a fly on the wall in Borghetti's office when he found out. I can't imagine this has been just done for optics as there is a cost to setting all this up. If there is a cost, then they must reckon they will make some money.
 
zkncj
Posts: 2978
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 10:27 pm

Velocity7 wrote:
SYDSpotter wrote:
a7ala wrote:

Where's the upside for qf (the nz upside is far more obvious) particularly given they already have a player in the domestic nz market?


Quote from the AusBT article:

"The alliance will see Qantas stamp its QF code onto 30 domestic AirNZ services across New Zealand, while the Kiwi carrier will in turn plant its NZ prefix on 85 domestic Qantas flight in Australia."

JQ's domestic NZ network is fairly limited compared with NZ, so I doubt there's a lot of cannibalisation. Ultimately both QF and NZ fly to the major population centres in AUS/NZ on their own metal, so the codeshares aren't exactly going to generate any significant incremental revenue opportunities for either QF or NZ. This arrangement makes things more convenient for a handful of flyers who would need to connect onto regional flights. The codeshare is more a slap in the face for VA rather than being any death knell for VA on trans-Tasman flying.


I have been thinking along the same lines. Is the sizzle better than the sausage here?

NZ run pretty deep into Australian capital cities and some of the larger regional centres like OOL, MCY, CNS etc (understand some are seasonal) which I would have thought is where ~98% of people want to go. Is there really that much connecting traffic to places that they don't already serve on their own metal or hopping between Australian cities?

I can see the benefit of this code share arrangement on an AKL-BNE-MKY routing for example but it and similar sized centres, must be a tiny proportion of the travelling demand?
If the code share was on trans Tasman, that's a whole different story but this isn't - it is purely domestic and I just can't see this huge upside for QF?
The 'message' that it sends from a marketing perspective is gold but I feel the reality is somewhat different.


One article did mention it would benefit 250,000 passengers that had been connecting to VA - while its only an small amount of traffic, its still 250,000 less passengers for VA to have taken off them all of an sudden. Which say if NZ on average paid VA $100AUD/passenger for these connections thats still $25,000,000 unless revenue for VA who are already fighting to live.

At the end of the days it more NZ/QF found common ground e.g. they both hate VA and they are merely doing this an hurt VA mesaure.
 
User avatar
eta unknown
Posts: 2111
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 5:03 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:31 pm

DeltaB717 wrote:
getluv wrote:
Qantas16 wrote:

QR won’t drop CBR until it is entitled to at least 35 weekly frequencies. Going from 21 up to 28 would only see QR add BNE; CBR will stay until they can operate twice daily at SYD without the tag.

Or could 7 new frequencies justify a second SYD terminator... bye-bye CBR tag.
 
getluv
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:41 pm

DeltaB717 wrote:
getluv wrote:
Qantas16 wrote:


QR won’t drop CBR until it is entitled to at least 35 weekly frequencies. Going from 21 up to 28 would only see QR add BNE; CBR will stay until they can operate twice daily at SYD without the tag.


For 30-40 passengers a flight between SYD-CBR, they will make SYD double daily by dropping CBR unless the ACT Government and CBR Airport are subsiding the crap out if it.
You meant lose, not loose.
 
planemanofnz
Posts: 3931
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:46 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:57 pm

getluv wrote:
For 30-40 passengers a flight between SYD-CBR, they will make SYD double daily by dropping CBR unless the ACT Government and CBR Airport are subsiding the crap out if it.

They have options to keep CBR, if CBR puts a half-decent subsidy on the table (which AFAIK, they did with SQ) - for example, what about DOH - CBR - AKL / WLG / CHC?

If oil keeps going up, then DOH - AKL as a non-stop might become un-viable, given the disproportionate effect of high oil on ULH flights - as such, a CBR stop may be used?

Cheers,

C.
 
QF744ER
Posts: 363
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2004 7:59 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 12:11 am

qf789 wrote:
QF23 SYD-BKK has returned to SYD with an engine problem

https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-u ... 5771390187


Interesting another CF6 issue, adds to the one involving -EBR on takeoff from BNE in mid April. I seem to recall one of the domestic A332's diverting to ADL earlier in the year whilst operating a sector to/from Perth with an engine shutdown, could've been -EBD.
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 6494
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 2:06 am

The PTA has confirmed that the new railway to PER will be at normal ticket prices and no additional fees will be charged for traveling in the airport perimeter like other airports do e.g. SYD

https://twitter.com/westaustralian/stat ... 9132605440
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
eta unknown
Posts: 2111
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 5:03 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 2:43 am

planemanofnz wrote:
getluv wrote:
For 30-40 passengers a flight between SYD-CBR, they will make SYD double daily by dropping CBR unless the ACT Government and CBR Airport are subsiding the crap out if it.

They have options to keep CBR, if CBR puts a half-decent subsidy on the table (which AFAIK, they did with SQ) - for example, what about DOH - CBR - AKL / WLG / CHC?
If oil keeps going up, then DOH - AKL as a non-stop might become un-viable, given the disproportionate effect of high oil on ULH flights - as such, a CBR stop may be used?
Cheers,
C.

Not gonna happen. And adding a CBR stop onto AKL will just make the ULH even more unviable. There is not enough of a market for CBR-NZ; if there was, NZ would be operating an A320 5x/week by now.

FYI there's an IATA general meeting in SYD tomorrow- some new route developments may come out of that.
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4778
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 3:42 am

qf789 wrote:
The PTA has confirmed that the new railway to PER will be at normal ticket prices and no additional fees will be charged for traveling in the airport perimeter like other airports do e.g. SYD

https://twitter.com/westaustralian/stat ... 9132605440

Sorry, you are wrong about Sydney, there is no "airport charge" of any description. What there is is a "facilities charge" to use ALL the stations on the Southern line loop which serves the airport which are Greens Square & Mascot as well as the two airport stations. This comes about because these four stations were built by a private property trust and the charge is levied to recover their outlays. Of course the whole thing went pear shaped and the NSW government brought out the trust BUT kept the charge, much to the annoyance of the people who moved into the large apartment developments around Greens Square & Mascot, as well as airport uses.So the charge is not just for the airport but applies to all stations on that line.

Gemuser
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 5083
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 3:58 am

A332 update.
•-EBA through to -EBN will be modified to incorporate WiFi and cabins of -EBG and -EBL reconfigured to the standard domestic configuration.
 
•-EBO through to -EBV to undergo a cabin reconfiguration which includes the addition of 1 Tech Crew Rest facility and an extra lavatory in Business Class.  
 
EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
getluv
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 4:26 am

planemanofnz wrote:
getluv wrote:
For 30-40 passengers a flight between SYD-CBR, they will make SYD double daily by dropping CBR unless the ACT Government and CBR Airport are subsiding the crap out if it.

They have options to keep CBR, if CBR puts a half-decent subsidy on the table (which AFAIK, they did with SQ) - for example, what about DOH - CBR - AKL / WLG / CHC?

If oil keeps going up, then DOH - AKL as a non-stop might become un-viable, given the disproportionate effect of high oil on ULH flights - as such, a CBR stop may be used?

Cheers,

C.


CBR and the ACT Government should be spending the money on making a Canberra a place to go, ather than being a transit point or a reason to get around bilateral agreements.

A city with a catchment over 400k, and they subside most of the airlines that fly there.
You meant lose, not loose.
 
getluv
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 4:33 am

Gemuser wrote:
qf789 wrote:
The PTA has confirmed that the new railway to PER will be at normal ticket prices and no additional fees will be charged for traveling in the airport perimeter like other airports do e.g. SYD

https://twitter.com/westaustralian/stat ... 9132605440

Sorry, you are wrong about Sydney, there is no "airport charge" of any description. What there is is a "facilities charge" to use ALL the stations on the Southern line loop which serves the airport which are Greens Square & Mascot as well as the two airport stations. This comes about because these four stations were built by a private property trust and the charge is levied to recover their outlays. Of course the whole thing went pear shaped and the NSW government brought out the trust BUT kept the charge, much to the annoyance of the people who moved into the large apartment developments around Greens Square & Mascot, as well as airport uses.So the charge is not just for the airport but applies to all stations on that line.

Gemuser


Green Square and Mascot are normal prices now.
You meant lose, not loose.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1201
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 5:31 am

eta unknown wrote:
There is not enough of a market for CBR-NZ; if there was, NZ would be operating an A320 5x/week by now.

Not sure that's correct. BITRE shows Wellington-Canberra had 2,000 pax each way (averaged inbound and outbound) in January, or the equivalent of 12 full A320 flights each way in the month. BITRE also shows an 80% seat utilisation for SQ flights NZ-Australia in that month (averaging both directions), so it's clear that the above figures do not include traffic merely transiting CBR. On the surface of it, that would mean that WLG-CBR could support (say) 3x weekly A320s in the summer.

AKL is a bigger market, for sure (more than 4x the population, plus the bonus of connections to and from the Americas). Extrapolating from WLG, you'd think that AKL ought to be able to fill a daily A320 to CBR. True, NZ do not (yet) fly that route, but I doubt if a lack of potential demand is the reason. Perhaps NZ has been scared off by the antics of CBR management. Or maybe they are awaiting the delivery of more A320/321 capacity starting later this year. Maybe there's something about not opening new destinations in the QF/NZ code-share arrangement. Or maybe there's another reason we are not privy to. Who knows - but the WLG experience would surely encourage NZ rather than discourage them.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
User avatar
RyanairGuru
Posts: 7293
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 5:50 am

Re CBR, I agree with Delta717 that it is safe until such a time as they get 42 weekly frequencies as BNE will be next, and even then there is a chance that they will use the 6th frequency for a doble daily MEL as SYD-CBR would still make more sense than something like MEL-HBA to gain a second frequency via the back door.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
Qantas16
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 3:51 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:04 am

Hong Kong Airlines is pulling out of Australia in October as they cancel their HKG-OOL-CNS-HKG flight.

Source: https://twitter.com/Airlineroute/status ... 3872001024

A shame that this couldn't work out for them, though CX must be happy they have CNS to themselves again!
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:19 am

Qantas16 wrote:
Hong Kong Airlines is pulling out of Australia in October as they cancel their HKG-OOL-CNS-HKG flight.

Source: https://twitter.com/Airlineroute/status ... 3872001024

A shame that this couldn't work out for them, though CX must be happy they have CNS to themselves again!

At 2x weekly I'm honestly not surprised by this cancellation.

Michael
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1487
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:24 am

a7ala wrote:
moa999 wrote:
a7ala wrote:
I wonder what this means for jetstar in new Zealand?


I suspect nothing. It serves its purpose and has nowhere near as many routes as NZ, and the LCCs aren't setup for connections.

I'm sure most people paying for QF over the Tasman (particularly in J weren't thrilled about going into JQ)


Do you think its a good strategy to help fill the planes of your competitor against your own subsidary?

What big j markets was qf missing out on outside of akl wlg chc zqn? I'm guessing 80% of new Zealand's population is within a couple of hours drive from these 4 airports.

Where's the upside for qf (the nz upside is far more obvious) particularly given they already have a player in the domestic nz market?


The upsides (for both) are that they are massively hitting VA and in some cases locking them totally out of the market. Im surprised that the ACCC and NZ equivalent are not looking at this. I know we have open skies, but to me this is not something envisaged under that...
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 4132
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:27 am

a7ala wrote:
moa999 wrote:
a7ala wrote:
I wonder what this means for jetstar in new Zealand?


I suspect nothing. It serves its purpose and has nowhere near as many routes as NZ, and the LCCs aren't setup for connections.

I'm sure most people paying for QF over the Tasman (particularly in J weren't thrilled about going into JQ)


Do you think its a good strategy to help fill the planes of your competitor against your own subsidary?

What big j markets was qf missing out on outside of akl wlg chc zqn? I'm guessing 80% of new Zealand's population is within a couple of hours drive from these 4 airports.

Where's the upside for qf (the nz upside is far more obvious) particularly given they already have a player in the domestic nz market?

The QF upside is they get more bums on their planes seats and less bums on VAs seats. Extra revenue for QF less for VA. Also means they don’t have to put as much funding into JQ.
57 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
SYDSpotter
Posts: 716
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:10 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:29 am

getluv wrote:
Gemuser wrote:
qf789 wrote:
The PTA has confirmed that the new railway to PER will be at normal ticket prices and no additional fees will be charged for traveling in the airport perimeter like other airports do e.g. SYD

https://twitter.com/westaustralian/stat ... 9132605440

Sorry, you are wrong about Sydney, there is no "airport charge" of any description. What there is is a "facilities charge" to use ALL the stations on the Southern line loop which serves the airport which are Greens Square & Mascot as well as the two airport stations. This comes about because these four stations were built by a private property trust and the charge is levied to recover their outlays. Of course the whole thing went pear shaped and the NSW government brought out the trust BUT kept the charge, much to the annoyance of the people who moved into the large apartment developments around Greens Square & Mascot, as well as airport uses.So the charge is not just for the airport but applies to all stations on that line.

Gemuser


Green Square and Mascot are normal prices now.


And the additional "charges" at these 2 stations were never as high as the charge at SYD domestic/international stations.
319_320_321_332_333_388 / 734_737_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W_789
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4778
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:35 am

getluv wrote:
Gemuser wrote:
qf789 wrote:
The PTA has confirmed that the new railway to PER will be at normal ticket prices and no additional fees will be charged for traveling in the airport perimeter like other airports do e.g. SYD

https://twitter.com/westaustralian/stat ... 9132605440

Sorry, you are wrong about Sydney, there is no "airport charge" of any description. What there is is a "facilities charge" to use ALL the stations on the Southern line loop which serves the airport which are Greens Square & Mascot as well as the two airport stations. This comes about because these four stations were built by a private property trust and the charge is levied to recover their outlays. Of course the whole thing went pear shaped and the NSW government brought out the trust BUT kept the charge, much to the annoyance of the people who moved into the large apartment developments around Greens Square & Mascot, as well as airport uses.So the charge is not just for the airport but applies to all stations on that line.

Gemuser


Green Square and Mascot are normal prices now.

Really! Since when? It is a couple of year since I last used either, got a reference?

Gemuser
 
alatar144
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 8:46 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:48 am

Gemuser wrote:
getluv wrote:
Gemuser wrote:
Sorry, you are wrong about Sydney, there is no "airport charge" of any description. What there is is a "facilities charge" to use ALL the stations on the Southern line loop which serves the airport which are Greens Square & Mascot as well as the two airport stations. This comes about because these four stations were built by a private property trust and the charge is levied to recover their outlays. Of course the whole thing went pear shaped and the NSW government brought out the trust BUT kept the charge, much to the annoyance of the people who moved into the large apartment developments around Greens Square & Mascot, as well as airport uses.So the charge is not just for the airport but applies to all stations on that line.

Gemuser


Green Square and Mascot are normal prices now.

Really! Since when? It is a couple of year since I last used either, got a reference?

Gemuser


It has been a while now, according to this article over 7 years. https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/tra ... 1be2s.html
QF EK ZL NZ UA TG AF CZ IB BA VY LH DY. CRJ700 E175 738 752 763 744 772 77W A319 A320 A333 A388 SAAB340B DH300
 
moa999
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 9:15 am

As I understand the PPP extends to 2030 when ownership of all 4 stations reverts to NSW Govt.

Since some traffic hurdles were met some 85% of revenue now goes to NSW Govt, but they effectively fund the removal of the gate fees on Mascot and Green Square.
 
sq256
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 10:37 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 9:36 am

Qantas16 wrote:
Hong Kong Airlines is pulling out of Australia in October as they cancel their HKG-OOL-CNS-HKG flight.

Source: https://twitter.com/Airlineroute/status ... 3872001024

A shame that this couldn't work out for them, though CX must be happy they have CNS to themselves again!


I wonder if this means VA on BNE-HKG (via the HX JV) instead of the long-mooted SYD/MEL-China route, despite the slot difficulties in HKG and HU's hub airports.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 3283
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 11:01 am

zkncj wrote:
At the end of the days it more NZ/QF found common ground e.g. they both hate VA and they are merely doing this an hurt VA mesaure.


See here's my problem with that. What does hurting VA do to benefit NZ? Sure, I appreciate how there is bad blood between them after all the VA Boardroom antics and Air New Zealand's subsequent divestment, but I don't see how that justifies a move like this. Kicking VA when they're down it just going to make for a stronger Qantas Group and a strong Qantas Group is more likely do things like:
- Launch a year round daily PER-AKL-PER service. Maybe CBR-AKL-CBR, ADL-AKL-ADL or CNS-AKL-CNS.
- Spend capital investing in additional aircraft (thus additional capacity and routes) for Jetstar NZ.
- Have Jetstar open routes like AKL-HNL-AKL with a 787. Maybe even another attempt at SIN-AKL-SIN? On short haul JQ might enter routes like AKL-MCY?
- Open up new ex-Australia routes like BNE-ORD-BNE which would compete for many of the same passengers as Air New Zealand's AKL-ORD-AKL route.
- Base some old A330s in AKL in a few years time to be used for additional Tasman capacity and maybe AKL-LAX-AKL or similar?
...or anything else that might compete with Air New Zealand and undermine their profits. My point is that, Tasman routes aside, I would have thought it was in Air New Zealand's interest to have VA be as strong as possible to 'counter' the Qantas group and 'keep them occupied' so to speak. When VA Group and QF Group have a domestic capacity war, that's less VA and QF aircraft flying on routes that compete against Air New Zealand (and compete for Air New Zealand's pax). As such, I find Air New Zealand switching their Australian partner from VA to QF a bit peculiar.

I'm not trying to say that this decision is going to push VA off the cliff, but they are well on their way to financial oblivion and any codeshare pax they can get from Air New Zealand are surely helpful in making ends meet.
Most recent aircraft flown: A318 F-GUGQ, A319 F-GRHR, A320ceo D-AIZH, A320neo D-AINE, A330-300 VH-QPD, A350-900 B-LRA, A380-800 D-AIMH, 717 VH-YQW, 737-600 LN-RPA, 737-700 OY-JTY, 737-800 LN-NGA, 767-300 ZK-NCI, 777-300 ZK-OKN, 787-9 VH-ZNA, CS100 HB-JBG
 
vossitch
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 11:17 am

Gemuser wrote:
qf789 wrote:
The PTA has confirmed that the new railway to PER will be at normal ticket prices and no additional fees will be charged for traveling in the airport perimeter like other airports do e.g. SYD

https://twitter.com/westaustralian/stat ... 9132605440

Sorry, you are wrong about Sydney, there is no "airport charge" of any description. What there is is a "facilities charge" to use ALL the stations on the Southern line loop which serves the airport which are Greens Square & Mascot as well as the two airport stations. This comes about because these four stations were built by a private property trust and the charge is levied to recover their outlays. Of course the whole thing went pear shaped and the NSW government brought out the trust BUT kept the charge, much to the annoyance of the people who moved into the large apartment developments around Greens Square & Mascot, as well as airport uses.So the charge is not just for the airport but applies to all stations on that line.

Gemuser
It's a charge applied to the airport station, why argue on the name of it? Either way it's a bollocks charge and the airport is fleecing the user.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4778
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 12:01 pm

vossitch wrote:
Gemuser wrote:
qf789 wrote:
The PTA has confirmed that the new railway to PER will be at normal ticket prices and no additional fees will be charged for traveling in the airport perimeter like other airports do e.g. SYD

https://twitter.com/westaustralian/stat ... 9132605440

Sorry, you are wrong about Sydney, there is no "airport charge" of any description. What there is is a "facilities charge" to use ALL the stations on the Southern line loop which serves the airport which are Greens Square & Mascot as well as the two airport stations. This comes about because these four stations were built by a private property trust and the charge is levied to recover their outlays. Of course the whole thing went pear shaped and the NSW government brought out the trust BUT kept the charge, much to the annoyance of the people who moved into the large apartment developments around Greens Square & Mascot, as well as airport uses.So the charge is not just for the airport but applies to all stations on that line.

Gemuser
It's a charge applied to the airport station, why argue on the name of it? Either way it's a bollocks charge and the airport is fleecing the user.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Go and read the above posts AGAIN. If ANYBODY is fleecing the user it is the NSW Government! For once its not the airport.

Gemuser
 
bunumuring
Posts: 2377
Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 2:56 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 3:34 pm

Hey guys,
I regularly use the East Hills / Airport line.... And the charges are listed as a "station access fee" for Both the International and Domestic stations. Definitely NO additional charges to use Green Square or Mascot and it's been that way for years.
The deal to build the airport line / extend the East Hills line and build the Wolli Creek interchange station was a pretty transparent one. We all knew that there would be additional charges to use the airport stations from the get-go.
No different to paying a toll on the toll ways : transparent, knew before construction started that we would pay for the privilege of using it and that eventually ownership would pass to the government.
And just like a tollway, if you don't want to pay, use another form of transport.
Cheers,
Bunumuring.
I just wanna live while I'm alive!
 
zakuivcustom
Posts: 1450
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:32 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 11:14 pm

eamondzhang wrote:
Qantas16 wrote:
Hong Kong Airlines is pulling out of Australia in October as they cancel their HKG-OOL-CNS-HKG flight.

Source: https://twitter.com/Airlineroute/status ... 3872001024

A shame that this couldn't work out for them, though CX must be happy they have CNS to themselves again!

At 2x weekly I'm honestly not surprised by this cancellation.

Michael


It's 3x Weekly (Leaving HKG on Tuesday/Thursday/Saturday). I guess with the new VA partnership, HX decided that there's no point of flying their own metal to a (very) secondary Australian destination. This way, HX can focus on other market (London via LGW again? :scratchchin: :scratchchin: )

Official announcement on HX's website:
https://www.hkairlines.com/en_HK/specia ... 0005557176

sq256 wrote:
Qantas16 wrote:
Hong Kong Airlines is pulling out of Australia in October as they cancel their HKG-OOL-CNS-HKG flight.

Source: https://twitter.com/Airlineroute/status ... 3872001024

A shame that this couldn't work out for them, though CX must be happy they have CNS to themselves again!


I wonder if this means VA on BNE-HKG (via the HX JV) instead of the long-mooted SYD/MEL-China route, despite the slot difficulties in HKG and HU's hub airports.


Won't be surprised if BNE is next after SYD.

And I don't think HKG slot situation is THIS bad, especially for 1 flight.
 
SYDSpotter
Posts: 716
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 9:10 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sat Jun 02, 2018 11:39 pm

zkojq wrote:

See here's my problem with that. What does hurting VA do to benefit NZ? Sure, I appreciate how there is bad blood between them after all the VA Boardroom antics and Air New Zealand's subsequent divestment, but I don't see how that justifies a move like this. Kicking VA when they're down it just going to make for a stronger Qantas Group and a strong Qantas Group is more likely do things like:
- Launch a year round daily PER-AKL-PER service. Maybe CBR-AKL-CBR, ADL-AKL-ADL or CNS-AKL-CNS.
- Spend capital investing in additional aircraft (thus additional capacity and routes) for Jetstar NZ.
- Have Jetstar open routes like AKL-HNL-AKL with a 787. Maybe even another attempt at SIN-AKL-SIN? On short haul JQ might enter routes like AKL-MCY?
- Open up new ex-Australia routes like BNE-ORD-BNE which would compete for many of the same passengers as Air New Zealand's AKL-ORD-AKL route.
- Base some old A330s in AKL in a few years time to be used for additional Tasman capacity and maybe AKL-LAX-AKL or similar?
...or anything else that might compete with Air New Zealand and undermine their profits. My point is that, Tasman routes aside, I would have thought it was in Air New Zealand's interest to have VA be as strong as possible to 'counter' the Qantas group and 'keep them occupied' so to speak. When VA Group and QF Group have a domestic capacity war, that's less VA and QF aircraft flying on routes that compete against Air New Zealand (and compete for Air New Zealand's pax). As such, I find Air New Zealand switching their Australian partner from VA to QF a bit peculiar.


Or a stronger QF Group can launch new routes to Asia/Europe which have no impact on NZ at all? QF's strategy doesn't revolve around solely competing with NZ and vice versa...
319_320_321_332_333_388 / 734_737_738_743_744_762_763_772_773_77W_789
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:56 am

So NZ ends the relationship with VA, VA responds by substantially upping its presence on the Tasman. Oops. NZ has no Australian feed and no option but QF, putting QF in the better bargaining position - who knows what they extracted for this deal?

New Zealand consumer is worse off as domestic heads into a pseudo monopoly situation - surely this requires Commerce Commission approval?

Then we have the usual anti VA crowd claiming absolute disaster for the carrier, bandying about things like the Tasman represents half of VA's international traffice, 75 per cent of bookings came via NZ - yet another figure that only 250,000 pax which suggests something's not adding up - and, of course, impending financial oblivion for VA.
Even if it were true, which it's not, the apparent glee by some on here is, well, not all that surprising.

So everyone take a breath. It's just a codeshare. And NZ has effed up its Australian efforts on multiple occasions now. They certainly have form!
 
User avatar
qf2220
Posts: 1487
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2013 9:16 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 1:59 am

I can confirm the Green Square and Mascot access fees haven't been around for quite a while. I live in the area and use them and they're same pricing as other stations.

Interesting fact though, if you catch the train from GS or Mascot, you pay a somewhat reduced station access fee at Domestic and International Stations.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 2:08 am

qf2220 wrote:
I can confirm the Green Square and Mascot access fees haven't been around for quite a while. I live in the area and use them and they're same pricing as other stations.

Interesting fact though, if you catch the train from GS or Mascot, you pay a somewhat reduced station access fee at Domestic and International Stations.


I find the Sydney airport train to be pretty awesome, actually. If you object you can always jump off at Mascot and catch the 400 bus for a tiny transfer charge. Adds about 10 minutes to your trip. There's also the other trick that Opal card users no doubt understand... WINK.

Compared to Melbourne where you have to queue for several buses sometimes and you're at the mercy of the Tullamarine traffic gods - I've missed flights twice by trying to be a good public transport citizen - and all for more than the Sydney train (plus you're already linked into the PT network whereas in Melbourne that's another $4.30), Sydney definitely comes out on top on this one.
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1201
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 2:09 am

aerokiwi wrote:
So NZ ends the relationship with VA, VA responds by substantially upping its presence on the Tasman. Oops. NZ has no Australian feed and no option but QF, putting QF in the better bargaining position - who knows what they extracted for this deal?


Agree - if I was QF I'd have been strong on Air NZ NOT opening new routes like AKL-HBA, AKL-CBR etc as a condition of the codeshare deal - otherwise what's in it for QF? Which may well be why, despite at least circumstantial evidence from SQ (see BITRE stats, which suggest 2000 pax each way averaged on WLG-CBR in January) that a decent market exists out of CBR to NZ, Air NZ has not taken the bait in the aftermath of the VA divorce.

aerokiwi wrote:
New Zealand consumer is worse off as domestic heads into a pseudo monopoly situation - surely this requires Commerce Commission approval?


Disagree - it's the Australian public flying within NZ that will be affected domestically within NZ, and the NZ consumer on domestic services is not impacted at all. Arguably, Air NZ benefits as many of the Australian pax would have flown JQ previously. And arguably Air NZ passengers flying within Australia will have more options under QF than under VA. Not sure what aspect of the arrangement you think that the Commerce Commission would have a legitimate interest in? There's no hint that this is a prelude to a JQ withdrawal; from NZ - if there was, then I'd agree with you. But absent that . . .

aerokiwi wrote:
Then we have the usual anti VA crowd claiming absolute disaster for the carrier, bandying about things like the Tasman represents half of VA's international traffice, 75 per cent of bookings came via NZ - yet another figure that only 250,000 pax which suggests something's not adding up - and, of course, impending financial oblivion for VA.
Even if it were true, which it's not, the apparent glee by some on here is, well, not all that surprising.


It's undeniable that VA will suffer through losing more bookings to Air NZ than Air NZ will lose to VA. So at a time when they are effectively losing pax to Air NZ they have gambled on increasing services. Whereas Air NZ have increased services at a time when all things being equal they should increase they passenger numbers at VA's expense. In sum: Air NZ is gaining passengers and increasing services, while VA is losing passengers, but still increasing services notwithstanding. It may not be financial oblivion for VA, but it certainly isn't a better place than they are in now. And couple that with strong rumours that some of their big foreign backers may be looking for a way out, and the picture for VA is not looking especially rosy. I'd be expecting to see a major VA marketing push in NZ because there's precious little presence of the carrier in NZ at all, aside from their services being sold through Air NZ. But so far, I've heard not a peep from them in the usual places that airlines seek to gain profile. Anyone else got any thoughts on that?

BTW, I think that the figure of 250,000 pax is not the number of pax using VA services across the Tasman, but the number of Air NZ passengers using VA codeshares domestically in Australia IIRC. Hence the apparent anomaly you highlight.

aerokiwi wrote:
So everyone take a breath. It's just a codeshare. And NZ has effed up its Australian efforts on multiple occasions now. They certainly have form!

Yes, it's just a codeshare. Hard to see though how NZ might "eff up" on this - with QF they can offer more flights to more destinations than was ever possible through VA. Where's the downside? If Air NZ and QF also fall out then there are worse outcomes than having to operate their own metal on AKL-HBA and AKL-CBR to pick up some of the pax, or even to operate a couple of services a day on BNE-SYD-MEL to pick up the pax who want a two-centre Australian trip.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 2:52 am

DavidByrne wrote:
aerokiwi wrote:
So NZ ends the relationship with VA, VA responds by substantially upping its presence on the Tasman. Oops. NZ has no Australian feed and no option but QF, putting QF in the better bargaining position - who knows what they extracted for this deal?


Agree - if I was QF I'd have been strong on Air NZ NOT opening new routes like AKL-HBA, AKL-CBR etc as a condition of the codeshare deal - otherwise what's in it for QF? Which may well be why, despite at least circumstantial evidence from SQ (see BITRE stats, which suggest 2000 pax each way averaged on WLG-CBR in January) that a decent market exists out of CBR to NZ, Air NZ has not taken the bait in the aftermath of the VA divorce.

aerokiwi wrote:
New Zealand consumer is worse off as domestic heads into a pseudo monopoly situation - surely this requires Commerce Commission approval?


Disagree - it's the Australian public flying within NZ that will be affected domestically within NZ, and the NZ consumer on domestic services is not impacted at all. Arguably, Air NZ benefits as many of the Australian pax would have flown JQ previously. And arguably Air NZ passengers flying within Australia will have more options under QF than under VA. Not sure what aspect of the arrangement you think that the Commerce Commission would have a legitimate interest in? There's no hint that this is a prelude to a JQ withdrawal; from NZ - if there was, then I'd agree with you. But absent that . . .

aerokiwi wrote:
Then we have the usual anti VA crowd claiming absolute disaster for the carrier, bandying about things like the Tasman represents half of VA's international traffice, 75 per cent of bookings came via NZ - yet another figure that only 250,000 pax which suggests something's not adding up - and, of course, impending financial oblivion for VA.
Even if it were true, which it's not, the apparent glee by some on here is, well, not all that surprising.


It's undeniable that VA will suffer through losing more bookings to Air NZ than Air NZ will lose to VA. So at a time when they are effectively losing pax to Air NZ they have gambled on increasing services. Whereas Air NZ have increased services at a time when all things being equal they should increase they passenger numbers at VA's expense. In sum: Air NZ is gaining passengers and increasing services, while VA is losing passengers, but still increasing services notwithstanding. It may not be financial oblivion for VA, but it certainly isn't a better place than they are in now. And couple that with strong rumours that some of their big foreign backers may be looking for a way out, and the picture for VA is not looking especially rosy. I'd be expecting to see a major VA marketing push in NZ because there's precious little presence of the carrier in NZ at all, aside from their services being sold through Air NZ. But so far, I've heard not a peep from them in the usual places that airlines seek to gain profile. Anyone else got any thoughts on that?

BTW, I think that the figure of 250,000 pax is not the number of pax using VA services across the Tasman, but the number of Air NZ passengers using VA codeshares domestically in Australia IIRC. Hence the apparent anomaly you highlight.

aerokiwi wrote:
So everyone take a breath. It's just a codeshare. And NZ has effed up its Australian efforts on multiple occasions now. They certainly have form!

Yes, it's just a codeshare. Hard to see though how NZ might "eff up" on this - with QF they can offer more flights to more destinations than was ever possible through VA. Where's the downside? If Air NZ and QF also fall out then there are worse outcomes than having to operate their own metal on AKL-HBA and AKL-CBR to pick up some of the pax, or even to operate a couple of services a day on BNE-SYD-MEL to pick up the pax who want a two-centre Australian trip.


While everyone seems to be basing their assertions on what's said in the media, VA seemed pretty non-plussed about the end of the NZ relationship. It was already pretty meagre with lounge access and points earning already curtailed. Now NZ spurred a 3rd competitor just when the Tasman was reduced to a duopoly. They had nowhere to go but QF.

Which leads to... how is this good for the consumer and can anyone confirm that this doesn't require regulatory approval? QF has a financial imperative now to curtail any competitive response from Jetstar either by ramping down services or halting expansion. It's effectively sown up the donestic market which is of little importance to anyone bar NZ and local passengers. The chance of having another carrier statrup is almost nil.

Meanwhile, given the Tasman's reputation for being a low yield bloodbath, maybe VA is happy to remain a niche carrier but focus its efforts elsewhere? They're getting brilliant reviews for their longhaul J class for instance. And domestic Oz load factors keep heading up. I'm thinking low fare Tassman and New Zealand flights really aren't as yield rich as domestic Australian.

I realise my Kiwi compatriots think New Zealand is a pretty crucial market and many of whom are gleefully critical of VA on here - particularly for being unfocussed etc - but perhaps New Zealand really isn't all that important and VA is concentrating on its strengths and core market. To be applauded I would have thought.
 
Qantas16
Posts: 601
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 3:51 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 3:17 am

zakuivcustom wrote:
eamondzhang wrote:
Qantas16 wrote:
Hong Kong Airlines is pulling out of Australia in October as they cancel their HKG-OOL-CNS-HKG flight.

Source: https://twitter.com/Airlineroute/status ... 3872001024

A shame that this couldn't work out for them, though CX must be happy they have CNS to themselves again!

At 2x weekly I'm honestly not surprised by this cancellation.

Michael


It's 3x Weekly (Leaving HKG on Tuesday/Thursday/Saturday). I guess with the new VA partnership, HX decided that there's no point of flying their own metal to a (very) secondary Australian destination. This way, HX can focus on other market (London via LGW again? :scratchchin: :scratchchin: )

Official announcement on HX's website:
https://www.hkairlines.com/en_HK/specia ... 0005557176


The route has operated nearly daily at some points around CNY IIRC... it's a shame for OOL and CNS.
 
moa999
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 3:55 am

Agree no hint of a JQ NZ withdrawal.
It serves its purpose as a point to point carrier, and connections and baggage interline are definitely not part of an LCCs DNA.

While QF Group may lose a few JQNX pax to NZ codeshares, I suspect they gain more by picking up people flying SYD-AKL-CHC-SYD who had switched to NZ for the better internal frequency and to avoid JQNZ
 
moa999
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:37 am

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 4:03 am

aerokiwi wrote:

Compared to Melbourne where you have to queue for several buses sometimes and you're at the mercy of the Tullamarine traffic gods...Sydney definitely comes out on top on this one.


I've never waited long for a SkyBus in Melbourne.

You also have the cheaper option of 901 bus and train from Broadmeadows, or 478/479/482 and 59 tram from Essendon

Journey times generally 50-70min depending on connections. For some parts of Melbourne this can be quicker.
 
getluv
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:11 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 4:49 am

aerokiwi wrote:
So NZ ends the relationship with VA, VA responds by substantially upping its presence on the Tasman. Oops. NZ has no Australian feed and no option but QF, putting QF in the better bargaining position - who knows what they extracted for this deal?

New Zealand consumer is worse off as domestic heads into a pseudo monopoly situation - surely this requires Commerce Commission approval?

Then we have the usual anti VA crowd claiming absolute disaster for the carrier, bandying about things like the Tasman represents half of VA's international traffice, 75 per cent of bookings came via NZ - yet another figure that only 250,000 pax which suggests something's not adding up - and, of course, impending financial oblivion for VA.
Even if it were true, which it's not, the apparent glee by some on here is, well, not all that surprising.

So everyone take a breath. It's just a codeshare. And NZ has effed up its Australian efforts on multiple occasions now. They certainly have form!


Well, you're a VA apologist so maybe you should have a breath and not let facts get in the way of reality. It's been mentioned countless times, there's no approval needed. As you said, this is a simple codesharing arrangement on domestic services in their respective domestic network.

For your information, VA international figures for March 2018 according to BITRE:

Inbound pax - ALL Services: 100 700 / New Zealand services - 56 817
Outbound pax - ALL Services: 101 682 / New Zealand services - 52 433

https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoi ... tions.aspx
You meant lose, not loose.
 
aerokiwi
Posts: 2483
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2000 1:17 pm

Re: Australian Aviation Thread - June 2018

Sun Jun 03, 2018 6:44 am

getluv wrote:
aerokiwi wrote:
So NZ ends the relationship with VA, VA responds by substantially upping its presence on the Tasman. Oops. NZ has no Australian feed and no option but QF, putting QF in the better bargaining position - who knows what they extracted for this deal?

New Zealand consumer is worse off as domestic heads into a pseudo monopoly situation - surely this requires Commerce Commission approval?

Then we have the usual anti VA crowd claiming absolute disaster for the carrier, bandying about things like the Tasman represents half of VA's international traffice, 75 per cent of bookings came via NZ - yet another figure that only 250,000 pax which suggests something's not adding up - and, of course, impending financial oblivion for VA.
Even if it were true, which it's not, the apparent glee by some on here is, well, not all that surprising.

So everyone take a breath. It's just a codeshare. And NZ has effed up its Australian efforts on multiple occasions now. They certainly have form!


Well, you're a VA apologist so maybe you should have a breath and not let facts get in the way of reality. It's been mentioned countless times, there's no approval needed. As you said, this is a simple codesharing arrangement on domestic services in their respective domestic network.

For your information, VA international figures for March 2018 according to BITRE:

Inbound pax - ALL Services: 100 700 / New Zealand services - 56 817
Outbound pax - ALL Services: 101 682 / New Zealand services - 52 433

https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoi ... tions.aspx


Ok cool. Figures prove that New Zealand is 50 per cent of their international pax. But aren't RPKs a more accurate measure of international revenues? And while I can't find that figure broken down by region at a glance at VA's annual report, I can see that New Zealand generated $150m in revenues. Meanwhile the rest of the world generated about $600m. It's a bit clumsy as it's based on sales in those regions, while Australian revenue accounts for domestic Australian only (I think).

But it's a good indication that New Zealand does not account for 50 per cent of VA's international business. Actually, quite far from it. Passengers, sure. But what's more important ya reckon?

And I'm certainly not a VA apologist. Time and again I've acknowledged their muck ups. But your continued campaign against them is truly bizarre. Because just about every criticism you lob at Virgin is applicable to Qantas, the latter with an inconsistent onboard product (international J, domestic Y IFE, A330 vs 737 transcon), inconsistent branding (1984 rang!), stagnating and mixed fleet (no narrowbodies on order, A320s and B717 and F100s) and chop and change longhaul strategy (later Dubai!). None of which I really cate about until the dumping on Virgin for the same thing, often inaccurately. It's almost like you're willing VA's demise. Why? Would you benefit in some way? Have they personally harmed you?

A common refrain on here is that VA should stick to its knitting. So which is it? Should they be smashing it on the Tasman in some ego-driven money burn fest or pulling back to domestic only "where they belong"?

And yes according to an NZ Herald article the codeshare doesn't require competition authority approval. I'd only read the AusBT one which made no mention. But given the impact on New Zealand domestic that seems remarkable.
Last edited by aerokiwi on Sun Jun 03, 2018 6:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 10

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos