At today’s presser of Guangzhou Baiyun Airport for Innovations in International Gateway Building on Tuesday, airport chief Mr Qiu Jiachen remarked Baiyun Airport is making great strides in a bid to build CAN into a world-class hub, eyeing nonstop service to Madrid, Chicago, Boston etc within the next 3 years, as per the Chinese report 未来可直飞马德里波士顿！白云机场三年内再开30条国际航线Nonstops to MAD BOS in CAN’s plan to expand international service

The airport has notched a 7.35% growth of pax numbers during Jan 1-June 24 this year, with a record-breaking 70 million expected for 2018, owing to the opening of the grand new Terminal #2 in April. CAN has a target of 100M pax per annum by 2025

Mr Qiu added that Baiyun Airport would capitalize on the opportunity that comes by the World Routes Conference 2018 to be held in Guangzhou this fall, in its push for “Silk Road in Air” construction by joining forces with more airlines to open more international services out of CAN, with an eye to becoming a gateway hub that connects Europe and Oceania

Must say these are great ambitious plans for CAN, putting itself in direct aggressive competition with HKG and other airports in the Pearl River Delta in South China and beyond

The Chinese media have a habit of lying to make big optimistic headlines. How many times have we heard, by 2020 China will be a leader in X, or have X by 2020. 2020 is 1.5 years away and most of those predictions are unlikely to come true. PEK was supposed to surpass ATL years ago and still no sign of that happening. With the economic slowdown happening now in China it will also curtail the growth plans I imagine, but I do wonder if/when AA will serve CAN to link up with CZ. Maybe it could launch ORD-CAN, and pull their flight from ORD-PVG.

ORD isn't happening unless something changes in the Bilateral, or if they get some slots from someone else, or it goes via a third city with no restrictions. It is not the first time it has been mentioned too, as a C-Suite employee of CZ mentioned it last year I believe. I'll have to dig the article up.

chrisp390 wrote:

The Chinese media have a habit of lying to make big optimistic headlines. How many times have we heard, by 2020 China will be a leader in X, or have X by 2020. 2020 is 1.5 years away and most of those predictions are unlikely to come true. PEK was supposed to surpass ATL years ago and still no sign of that happening. With the economic slowdown happening now in China it will also curtail the growth plans I imagine, but I do wonder if/when AA will serve CAN to link up with CZ. Maybe it could launch ORD-CAN, and pull their flight from ORD-PVG.

Most likely would stop in a third city, imo.

ORD-Asia fares are already at the dirt level. That certainly wont help.

nmdrdh787 wrote:

ORD isn't happening unless something changes in the Bilateral, or if they get some slots from someone else, or it goes via a third city with no restrictions. It is not the first time it has been mentioned too, as a C-Suite employee of CZ mentioned it last year I believe. I'll have to dig the article up.

Thanks for posting this. It's not a matter of if, but when.

A little out of left field, but i can see CAN-DFW doing not too terrible on CZ.

chrisp390 wrote:

The Chinese media have a habit of lying to make big optimistic headlines. How many times have we heard, by 2020 China will be a leader in X, or have X by 2020. 2020 is 1.5 years away and most of those predictions are unlikely to come true. PEK was supposed to surpass ATL years ago and still no sign of that happening. With the economic slowdown happening now in China it will also curtail the growth plans I imagine, but I do wonder if/when AA will serve CAN to link up with CZ. Maybe it could launch ORD-CAN, and pull their flight from ORD-PVG.

Sometimes i think thats just fear-mongering in the US. OT but India is the next world power, if they can cut down on the beareuocracy (too lazy to spell check).

China has been wanting Open Skies lately, but is there a chance them and the US could at least raise the number of frequencies?

The plan also mentions new routes to Australia - I wonder if a CAN - CBR - WLG route could be possible, particularly if the Chinese government pushed it?

Aside from those, I see OOL as having some potential (particularly with HX pulling out). I don't see DRW working, even on a narrow-body. DZ has it covered.

Cheers,

C.

http://www.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2018-0 ... 039938.htm

It actually said something more than that.
CAN will:
- Cooperate with more carriers, improve frequency, optimize aircraft types, expand European and NA routes, hold onto advantageous position on Oceanic and SEAsia routes, establish African express service and develop South America route to construct a better silk road in the air with 30 new routes planned in next 3 years.
- For European routes, Madrid and such are planned, with the aim of using the geological location of Guangzhou to construct a hub between Europe and Oceania
- For North America market, push for Chicago direct flight and routes to the like of Boston
- For AU/NZ market, increase capacity on MEL/SYD/AKL/etc routes to enhance competitiveness with more varieties
- For Africa market, tourist destinations like Casablanca will be the main focus
- For Asia, the focus on new routes will be capitals of countries in the continent, in order to complete the network from Guangzhou to Asian countries.

I know HU applied for CAN-MAN slots for this summer, so there is clearly an intent on linking CAN with second tier European routes.

planemanofnz wrote:

The plan also mentions new routes to Australia - I wonder if a CAN - CBR - WLG route could be possible, particularly if the Chinese government pushed it?

Nope. Not while Chinese nationals require a transit visa for Australia to connect into Wellington. Have you noticed that no Chinese airlines have ever flown the tasman?

a7ala wrote:

planemanofnz wrote:

The plan also mentions new routes to Australia - I wonder if a CAN - CBR - WLG route could be possible, particularly if the Chinese government pushed it?

Nope. Not while Chinese nationals require a transit visa for Australia to connect into Wellington. Have you noticed that no Chinese airlines have ever flown the tasman?

That's technically not true - for example, MU has flown China - SYD - AKL before, albeit 15-20 years ago. Plus, multiple carriers still transit through Australia to New Zealand (or have done so), despite the visa requirement for a chunk of their passengers, like D7. I agree though that this may disproportionately affect a Chinese carrier, relative to the existing fifth-freedom operators on the Tasman.

Cheers,

C.

If MAD happened it would mean service to HKG, SZX and CAN

Only a couple years ago the only China service was CA to PEK

planemanofnz wrote:

That's technically not true - for example, MU has flown China - SYD - AKL before, albeit 15-20 years ago. Plus, multiple carriers still transit through Australia to New Zealand (or have done so), despite the visa requirement for a chunk of their passengers, like D7. I agree though that this may disproportionately affect a Chinese carrier, relative to the existing fifth-freedom operators on the Tasman.

Theres certainly nothing in the schedules going back to 2000 that I can see - are you talking about charters because thats a completely different thing. Or maybe they didnt have a transit visa requirement 20 years ago? Sure Chinese visitors wanting to do a dual Australia/New Zealand wont have an issue, but the number of these are becoming less and less. And to be honest I dont think a combined CBR/WLG experience would be high on their list?

A chinese carrier would want to be able to send their nationals to WLG without fuss and the transit visa would be too much of a hassle/cost when they can send them via AKL or CHC with no transit visa. Dont get me wrong I think a chinese carrier should be looking at WLG hard, but the reality is that without a runway extension its going to be difficult to serve in a viable way. The sad fact is that CBR might get a chinese service first with half the market - because they can...

a7ala wrote:

Theres certainly nothing in the schedules going back to 2000 that I can see - are you talking about charters because thats a completely different thing. Or maybe they didnt have a transit visa requirement 20 years ago? Sure Chinese visitors wanting to do a dual Australia/New Zealand wont have an issue, but the number of these are becoming less and less. And to be honest I dont think a combined CBR/WLG experience would be high on their list?

A chinese carrier would want to be able to send their nationals to WLG without fuss and the transit visa would be too much of a hassle/cost when they can send them via AKL or CHC with no transit visa. Dont get me wrong I think a chinese carrier should be looking at WLG hard, but the reality is that without a runway extension its going to be difficult to serve in a viable way. The sad fact is that CBR might get a chinese service first with half the market - because they can...

Sorry - it wasn't MU - it was CA, and it was a scheduled service from 2000 to 2001.

Air China had briefly flown here in 2000 as an add-on to its Sydney services ...

See:
- https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/new ... d=11559287.
- https://www.transport.govt.nz/air/inter ... ewzealand/.

The reason I suggested CBR and WLG for CZ is because CAN's so-called 30 new routes strategy did mention Australia as a possible expansion region. Realistically, the only new destinations CZ could be looking at in Australia would be CBR and OOL, surely? It's questionable whether either would be viable on their own (as per SQ and HX's experiences, respectively).

In considering a tag flight, within the broader Australasia / Oceania region, according to anna.aero, the cities with the most demand that currently have no Chinese services are NAN and WLG, ahead of any Australian city. Fiji is supposedly blocking a Chinese carrier from serving it (as per an interview last month with FJ's CEO), so that leaves WLG as the top contender.

China has in the past been all about flying 'political' routes - HAV, PTY and others spring to mind. Whether that, in tandem with the un-met demand will be enough to launch this flight without a transit visa waiver, is unclear. Perhaps Australia would be willing to waive the transit visa requirement for this particular flight? Both China and New Zealand might lobby for a waiver.

Anyway, just a thought.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

a7ala wrote:

Theres certainly nothing in the schedules going back to 2000 that I can see - are you talking about charters because thats a completely different thing. Or maybe they didnt have a transit visa requirement 20 years ago? Sure Chinese visitors wanting to do a dual Australia/New Zealand wont have an issue, but the number of these are becoming less and less. And to be honest I dont think a combined CBR/WLG experience would be high on their list?

A chinese carrier would want to be able to send their nationals to WLG without fuss and the transit visa would be too much of a hassle/cost when they can send them via AKL or CHC with no transit visa. Dont get me wrong I think a chinese carrier should be looking at WLG hard, but the reality is that without a runway extension its going to be difficult to serve in a viable way. The sad fact is that CBR might get a chinese service first with half the market - because they can...

Sorry - it wasn't MU - it was CA, and it was a scheduled service from 2000 to 2001.

Air China had briefly flown here in 2000 as an add-on to its Sydney services ...

See:
- https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/new ... d=11559287.
- https://www.transport.govt.nz/air/inter ... ewzealand/.

The reason I suggested CBR and WLG for CZ is because CAN's so-called 30 new routes strategy did mention Australia as a possible expansion region. Realistically, the only new destinations CZ could be looking at in Australia would be CBR and OOL, surely? It's questionable whether either would be viable on their own (as per SQ and HX's experiences, respectively).

In considering a tag flight, within the broader Australasia / Oceania region, according to anna.aero, the cities with the most demand that currently have no Chinese services are NAN and WLG, ahead of any Australian city. Fiji is supposedly blocking a Chinese carrier from serving it (as per an interview last month with FJ's CEO), so that leaves WLG as the top contender.

China has in the past been all about flying 'political' routes - HAV, PTY and others spring to mind. Whether that, in tandem with the un-met demand will be enough to launch this flight without a transit visa waiver, is unclear. Perhaps Australia would be willing to waive the transit visa requirement for this particular flight? Both China and New Zealand might lobby for a waiver.

Anyway, just a thought.

Cheers,

C.

Yes I went back and found Air China in BITRE as well - looks like they flew 1/week July00-Feb01 and averaged 25% LF which is probably why it stopped.

I think if it was a government thing it would be more likely PEK rather than CAN. And I get the sense countries are wanting to know more about the people that are visiting and passing through rather than less, so visas and other similar documents are unfortunately here to stay and likely to get more widespread. And dont think for 1 minute the Australian govt would want to encourage anything that would help travel to New Zealand....

TWA772LR wrote:

A little out of left field, but i can see CAN-DFW doing not too terrible on CZ.

Dallas/Ft. Worth has to be one of the largest Chinese population centers in the US that is not served by a Chinese carrier. Sure, there are the AA nonstops to Beijing and Shanghai, but they gouge the local DFW market and are usually well over $2,000 RT in economy, forcing most passengers to connect on the west coast when going DFW-China.

With the large and fast growing local Chinese population, the strong local business travel market of the DFW area, as well as Southeast Asians that could connect in China, I'm surprised that we haven't seen a Chinese carrier enter the market yet. At least 4x per week.

mfe777 wrote:

TWA772LR wrote:

A little out of left field, but i can see CAN-DFW doing not too terrible on CZ.

Dallas/Ft. Worth has to be one of the largest Chinese population centers in the US that is not served by a Chinese carrier. Sure, there are the AA nonstops to Beijing and Shanghai, but they gouge the local DFW market and are usually well over $2,000 RT in economy, forcing most passengers to connect on the west coast when going DFW-China.

With the large and fast growing local Chinese population, the strong local business travel market of the DFW area, as well as Southeast Asians that could connect in China, I'm surprised that we haven't seen a Chinese carrier enter the market yet. At least 4x per week.

From wiki it seems like it would be the third largest one without Chinese service, with Philadelphia being the largest one and Sacramento being the second largest, slightly leading SAN, HNL, ATL. All except DFW have no nonstop flight to mainland China at all. Their Chinese population are all just about 50k each with about 80k near PHL that I don't think they're enough to justify a new nonstop service.

Gulf Air might add CAN as well as they plan to return to China according to Arabian av thread.

As the 2018 World Routes Conference is underway in Guangzhou, its gateway hub Baiyun Airport/CAN is taking center stage bagging a number of international routes, as local newspaper Xinkuaibao reports 白云机场将与7家国内外航空公司签约新开国际航线28条CAN to open 28 international routes via deals with 7 airlines

CAN is reportedly to sign deals with 7 airlines at home and abroad for the launch of 28 international routes

According to Baiyun Airport Chief Mr Qiu Jiachen, CAN is expected to launch 14 new longhaul routes to Europe and the Americas over the next 3 years, eg. Milan, São Paulo(cargo service), citing deals signed at the conference

Mr Qiu added CAN is to further expand its infrastructure via a 3rd phase expansion project already in the stage for official approval, which would add two more rwys and a 3rd terminal to the airport, substantially uplifting the hub status of CAN in the Pearl River Delta

Interesting to note what the planned longhaul routes specifically are