As part of SIA Group transformation program announced earlier this year, today the group has announced host of routes will be transferred between airline subsidiaries.

17 SilkAir routes will be transferred to Scoot - Vientiane, Coimbatore, Trivandrum, Foshou, Changsha, Kunming, Wuhan, Kota Kinabalu, Balikpapan, Lombok, Makassar, Manado, Samarang, Yogyakarta, Luang Prabang.
As part of the route growth at Scoot, Silk will also transfer 14 737-800 to Scoot.

In turn, Scoot will transfer 2 routes to Silk - Shenzhen and Kochi, while transferring Bengaluru and Chennai India to SQ.

Additionally, the changes will see Scoot will drop is Honolulu Hawaii service that operates via Osaka in June 2019.

Per SIA CEO, the adjustment will "align vehicles in our portfolio of airlines deployed to the right markets,”


SilkAir to give up some routes to Scoot ahead of merger with SIA; Scoot to suspend flights to Honolulu
https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/ ... a-scoot-to

Singapore Airlines to transfer SilkAir routes to budget arm Scoot
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sing ... SKCN1NR04I

=

Seems Scoot is becoming a big star in the SIA portfolio.

Too bad on HNL, but it was certainly a crowded market with 4 other airlines also serving the Osaka route.

I wonder what this says about Silk (which will be merged into SQ mainline)?
Guess SIA does not believe mainline can serve these markets successfully with its cost base even on a narrowbody and prefers to use its Scoot subsidiary instead.

Also those 14 737-800s will be a bit oddball for Scoot which has 50+ in service/on order A320s.

How will this affect transfers? Can you connect between SQ and Scoot?

Interesting move.

Yes seems like Scoot must be an attractive platform for SIA.

The mix of 737 and A320 on their certificate, however, will create some inefficiency. Wonder if this is short term solution, or if Scoot will be mixed fleet operator of narrowbodies?

unrave wrote:

How will this affect transfers? Can you connect between SQ and Scoot?

You can already transfer between Scoot and Singapore Airlines and SilkAir.

mercure1 wrote:

Interesting move.

Yes seems like Scoot must be an attractive platform for SIA.

The mix of 737 and A320 on their certificate, however, will create some inefficiency. Wonder if this is short term solution, or if Scoot will be mixed fleet operator of narrowbodies?

unrave wrote:

How will this affect transfers? Can you connect between SQ and Scoot?

You can already transfer between Scoot and Singapore Airlines and SilkAir.

They have the mix A319/20ceo, today so it should not make a big difference. This way it is also easier to let the 737-800s go early and SQ narrow body will be 737-Max and Scoot narrow body will be A32xneo. By doing it now you only need to reconfigure the 737-max to SQ standards which includes full IFE while the A32x/737-800 to be transferred (and have a shoter lifespan in the fleet) need only a wifi upgrade and branding, but not a full expensive reconfiguration.

janders wrote:

I wonder what this says about Silk (which will be merged into SQ mainline)?
Guess SIA does not believe mainline can serve these markets successfully with its cost base even on a narrowbody and prefers to use its Scoot subsidiary instead.

The difference is simple:
business destinations = SQ
non-business destinations = Scoot
The Scoot routes listed are busy, but either with people on vacation or with people travelling for family reasons.

mercure1 wrote:

unrave wrote:

How will this affect transfers? Can you connect between SQ and Scoot?

You can already transfer between Scoot and Singapore Airlines and SilkAir.

Also, Scoot will be moving to Terminal 1 in SIN sometime during Q4 2019. So you'd have them spread out across 3 terminals vs. 2 terminals at present.

I thought Scoot and Silk were going to be combined to the SQ brand.

Well planned move on SIA's part. Definitely some great decision making skills exhibited by the management.

Dreamflight767 wrote:

I thought Scoot and Silk were going to be combined to the SQ brand.

Only SilkAir will be absorbed into SIA for unifying the brand as it is an underwhelming product and SIA wants to deliver consistency across its services. Scoot will continue to be the budget arm of SIA.

EmoticonsAllDay wrote:

Well planned move on SIA's part. Definitely some great decision making skills exhibited by the management.

Though very similar to what QF has done - it merged Australian Airlines back into Qantas and ramped up Jetstar. I will stir the pot and say that SQ is perhaps 10-15 years behind QF...

qf2220 wrote:

Though very similar to what QF has done - it merged Australian Airlines back into Qantas and ramped up Jetstar. I will stir the pot and say that SQ is perhaps 10-15 years behind QF...

Only if SQ had branded their LCC a bit better. Scoot is way too cartoonish and the colour theme a bit awful imo. JQ on the other hand seems more like a professional sounding LCC, and complements QF well.

Scoot is on the lines of other poorly branded LCC offshoots of other major airlines like Level, Joon, Swoop , etc.

qf2220 wrote:

EmoticonsAllDay wrote:

Well planned move on SIA's part. Definitely some great decision making skills exhibited by the management.

Though very similar to what QF has done - it merged Australian Airlines back into Qantas and ramped up Jetstar. I will stir the pot and say that SQ is perhaps 10-15 years behind QF...

And Jetstar was originally impulse prior to that which QF bought. Just as Tiger was before it become Scoot, although I believe Tiger was an SIA start up.

I think SQ needs to look at their process and staffing levels, at an offshore airport level I have never seen a less efficient, overstaffed airline. They could save millions globally without compromising service by restructuring their airports team out of the 70s/80s. I’d be amazed if the rest of the organisation wasn’t the same.

AngMoh wrote:

mercure1 wrote:

Interesting move.

Yes seems like Scoot must be an attractive platform for SIA.

The mix of 737 and A320 on their certificate, however, will create some inefficiency. Wonder if this is short term solution, or if Scoot will be mixed fleet operator of narrowbodies?

unrave wrote:

How will this affect transfers? Can you connect between SQ and Scoot?

You can already transfer between Scoot and Singapore Airlines and SilkAir.

They have the mix A319/20ceo, today so it should not make a big difference. This way it is also easier to let the 737-800s go early and SQ narrow body will be 737-Max and Scoot narrow body will be A32xneo. By doing it now you only need to reconfigure the 737-max to SQ standards which includes full IFE while the A32x/737-800 to be transferred (and have a shoter lifespan in the fleet) need only a wifi upgrade and branding, but not a full expensive reconfiguration.

janders wrote:

I wonder what this says about Silk (which will be merged into SQ mainline)?
Guess SIA does not believe mainline can serve these markets successfully with its cost base even on a narrowbody and prefers to use its Scoot subsidiary instead.

The difference is simple:
business destinations = SQ
non-business destinations = Scoot
The Scoot routes listed are busy, but either with people on vacation or with people travelling for family reasons.

Those are definitely all Tourist and VFR routes and better for Scoot. It makes sense to have 2 brands vs. 3 and to break them up this way. Nicely explained. Thank you.

I hope Scoot introduces a new livery, the current one looks like a cheap chocolate bar.

AngMoh wrote:

They have the mix A319/20ceo, today so it should not make a big difference. .

Adding 14 737s to an all-Airbus narrowbody fleet is not a trivial thing. They will need different crews, maintenance, etc.

Will add to cost and complicate things like aircraft schedule flexibility, crewing, training, ground handling.(Scoot will adopt ULDs for future NEOs, versus bulk loading on 737s)

As a pilot, I actually enjoy seeing Scoot's livery. The yellow is done well, not overly in your face like Spirit Airlines.

Also as a budget LCC, I think its branding is appropriate. Being quirky and bit childish seems to be the norm for carriers in the region which often use things like mascots, or seek to attract families with fun humorous marketing.

And mixing 737s into Airbus narrowbody fleet will indeed bring complication and cost to the operation. For their sake, hopefully, its a short-term measure until more NEOs arrive.

janders wrote:

AngMoh wrote:

They have the mix A319/20ceo, today so it should not make a big difference. .

Adding 14 737s to an all-Airbus narrowbody fleet is not a trivial thing. They will need different crews, maintenance, etc.

Will add to cost and complicate things like aircraft schedule flexibility, crewing, training, ground handling.(Scoot will adopt ULDs for future NEOs, versus bulk loading on 737s)

Some of these resources can be shared at the group level, and there are a lot of 737s and related supporting resources within the group.

UPlog wrote:

As a pilot, I actually enjoy seeing Scoot's livery. The yellow is done well, not overly in your face like Spirit Airlines.

Also as a budget LCC, I think its branding is appropriate. Being quirky and bit childish seems to be the norm for carriers in the region which often use things like mascots, or seek to attract families with fun humorous marketing.

Agreed. Their new uniform is one of my favourites.

janders wrote:

AngMoh wrote:

They have the mix A319/20ceo, today so it should not make a big difference. .

Adding 14 737s to an all-Airbus narrowbody fleet is not a trivial thing. They will need different crews, maintenance, etc.

Wouldn't it be easier for MI's crews to be seconded to TZ?

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

janders wrote:

AngMoh wrote:

They have the mix A319/20ceo, today so it should not make a big difference. .

Adding 14 737s to an all-Airbus narrowbody fleet is not a trivial thing. They will need different crews, maintenance, etc.

Wouldn't it be easier for MI's crews to be seconded to TZ?

Yes, most of the staff can be easily. Shouldn't be an issue. Only exception maybe Cabin crew of Silk. That would be a downgrade for them from an FSC to an LCC. So they'd be better off being absorbed into SQ. And then just get new hires for Scoot.

smi0006 wrote:

Just as Tiger was before it become Scoot, although I believe Tiger was an SIA start up.

Tiger and Scoot were indeed SIA start ups. Initially Tiger was planned to be the short haul LCC like most other LCCs and Scoot was supposed to be the long haul LCC like Norwegian and AirAsia X. It was evident by the fact that Tiger used A320s while Scoot operated B787 until before the merger. But then the decision to merge Tiger and Scoot was made except for the Australian Tiger which to this date retains its name.

SGAviation wrote:

Also, Scoot will be moving to Terminal 1 in SIN sometime during Q4 2019. So you'd have them spread out across 3 terminals vs. 2 terminals at present.

Why is Scoot moving to T1? Any sources?

EmoticonsAllDay wrote:

But then the decision to merge Tiger and Scoot was made except for the Australian Tiger which to this date retains its name.

Noting that Aus Tiger is no longer part of the SIA Group, rather is now owned by Virgin Australia, in which SIA has a small shareholding alongside a bunch of other airlines.

EmoticonsAllDay wrote:

Why is Scoot moving to T1? Any sources?

There you go. You're welcome.
https://www.tnp.sg/news/singapore/scoot-move-changi-airport-t1-late-next-year
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/scoot-to-move-operations-to-changi-airport-s-terminal-1-10932694

EmoticonsAllDay wrote:

smi0006 wrote:

Just as Tiger was before it become Scoot, although I believe Tiger was an SIA start up.

Tiger and Scoot were indeed SIA start ups. Initially Tiger was planned to be the short haul LCC like most other LCCs and Scoot was supposed to be the long haul LCC like Norwegian and AirAsia X. It was evident by the fact that Tiger used A320s while Scoot operated B787 until before the merger. But then the decision to merge Tiger and Scoot was made except for the Australian Tiger which to this date retains its name.

Don't forget Tigerair Taiwan. Initially SQ Group has 10% stake, now fully owned by CI Group after Tigerair Singapore was merged into Scoot, taking the latter's name and IATA code.

The cut in Scoot's HNL service maybe considered as a defeat against AirAsia?

Not sure if this is a good idea at all in long run for TZ to take over some of the regional route where SQ Group has spent past 30 years building up significant premium travelers through MI. Those travelling ex-Singapore will lost access to J cabin to BKI, BPN, JOG, CNX, and host of other secondary regional routes where MI is now plying with mixed J and Y cabin. Also, Y premium travelers will also lost their access to complimentary 30kg luggage, meal and IFE on board, lounge access. Not every one is LCC-fan.

To add salt onto premium travelers' wound, there will be no more SQ Elite Miles accrual, Velocity points for VA travelers, effectively blocking out Gold/PPS members of of both SQ and VA. They might as well take their business to GA or MH.

c933103 wrote:

The cut in Scoot's HNL service maybe considered as a defeat against AirAsia?

Well, you win some, you lose some. C'est la vie

Not surprised that HNL got dropped. I also have to wonder how this will affect A330 operations, as they have been primarily the regional aircraft...could the 737 MAX 10, in a 3-class configuration (J, Y+, Y) take over some of those operations with the 787-10? (The idea is similar to what CM is doing with its MAX 9 - 166 seats in 3 classes.)

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Not surprised that HNL got dropped. I also have to wonder how this will affect A330 operations, as they have been primarily the regional aircraft...could the 737 MAX 10, in a 3-class configuration (J, Y+, Y) take over some of those operations with the 787-10? (The idea is similar to what CM is doing with its MAX 9 - 166 seats in 3 classes.)

The A330s are on their way out, to be replaced by 787-10 and regional config A359s.

juliuswong wrote:

Not sure if this is a good idea at all in long run for TZ to take over some of the regional route where SQ Group has spent past 30 years building up significant premium travelers through MI. Those travelling ex-Singapore will lost access to J cabin to BKI, BPN, JOG, CNX, and host of other secondary regional routes where MI is now plying with mixed J and Y cabin. Also, Y premium travelers will also lost their access to complimentary 30kg luggage, meal and IFE on board, lounge access. Not every one is LCC-fan.

The destinations replaced with Scoot are mostly the least premium heavy as the routes previously sustained on tourist and leisure travellers than the business travellers even for SilkAir. They could always bring in the Dreamliners configured with ScootBiz if they had to which IMO is definitely better than SilkAir's current J.

avier wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

Though very similar to what QF has done - it merged Australian Airlines back into Qantas and ramped up Jetstar. I will stir the pot and say that SQ is perhaps 10-15 years behind QF...

Only if SQ had branded their LCC a bit better. Scoot is way too cartoonish and the colour theme a bit awful imo. JQ on the other hand seems more like a professional sounding LCC, and complements QF well.

Scoot is on the lines of other poorly branded LCC offshoots of other major airlines like Level, Joon, Swoop , etc.

Agreed, though not being from Singapore and not being south east Asian I don't understand the nuances of branding etc for that region and so can't say whether these are the views of the target market or not.

smi0006 wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

EmoticonsAllDay wrote:

Well planned move on SIA's part. Definitely some great decision making skills exhibited by the management.

Though very similar to what QF has done - it merged Australian Airlines back into Qantas and ramped up Jetstar. I will stir the pot and say that SQ is perhaps 10-15 years behind QF...

And Jetstar was originally impulse prior to that which QF bought. Just as Tiger was before it become Scoot, although I believe Tiger was an SIA start up.

I think SQ needs to look at their process and staffing levels, at an offshore airport level I have never seen a less efficient, overstaffed airline. They could save millions globally without compromising service by restructuring their airports team out of the 70s/80s. I’d be amazed if the rest of the organisation wasn’t the same.

Not surprising. Given SQ (and many others in the region like CX, TG etc have had a prime position (which has favoured their profitability) they probably haven't had to worry about cost as much as other carriers like QF, BA and others who are less advantaged geographically and have had to make changes to the way they do things to improve profitability.

EmoticonsAllDay wrote:

juliuswong wrote:

Not sure if this is a good idea at all in long run for TZ to take over some of the regional route where SQ Group has spent past 30 years building up significant premium travelers through MI. Those travelling ex-Singapore will lost access to J cabin to BKI, BPN, JOG, CNX, and host of other secondary regional routes where MI is now plying with mixed J and Y cabin. Also, Y premium travelers will also lost their access to complimentary 30kg luggage, meal and IFE on board, lounge access. Not every one is LCC-fan.

The destinations replaced with Scoot are mostly the least premium heavy as the routes previously sustained on tourist and leisure travellers than the business travellers even for SilkAir. They could always bring in the Dreamliners configured with ScootBiz if they had to which IMO is definitely better than SilkAir's current J.

This is where you are wrong. MI commands its own legion of premium pax who wouldn't mind to spend those extra dollars to get to their destinations by spending those few extra hundreds of dollars to "stay away from LCC crowd". A big chunk of these pax flown in via SQ and transfer to their holiday destinations for short getaway or long holidays. They seeks premium holiday package, not those "hipster-bunk bed" type. In addition, most of these smaller airports can't handle wide body such as 787 so bringing them into smaller regional route will be redundant and overkill for most regional routes.

juliuswong wrote:

EmoticonsAllDay wrote:

juliuswong wrote:

Not sure if this is a good idea at all in long run for TZ to take over some of the regional route where SQ Group has spent past 30 years building up significant premium travelers through MI. Those travelling ex-Singapore will lost access to J cabin to BKI, BPN, JOG, CNX, and host of other secondary regional routes where MI is now plying with mixed J and Y cabin. Also, Y premium travelers will also lost their access to complimentary 30kg luggage, meal and IFE on board, lounge access. Not every one is LCC-fan.

The destinations replaced with Scoot are mostly the least premium heavy as the routes previously sustained on tourist and leisure travellers than the business travellers even for SilkAir. They could always bring in the Dreamliners configured with ScootBiz if they had to which IMO is definitely better than SilkAir's current J.

This is where you are wrong. MI commands its own legion of premium pax who wouldn't mind to spend those extra dollars to get to their destinations by spending those few extra hundreds of dollars to "stay away from LCC crowd". A big chunk of these pax flown in via SQ and transfer to their holiday destinations for short getaway or long holidays. They seeks premium holiday package, not those "hipster-bunk bed" type. In addition, most of these smaller airports can't handle wide body such as 787 so bringing them into smaller regional route will be redundant and overkill for most regional routes.

That may be the case now, but is unlikely to stay that way in future. What we have seen globally, and are starting to see in SE Asia, is the commoditisation of short-haul routes. People are getting used to LCC style service on mainline carriers on short-haul routes, or as will happen here, using the LCC brand for the short part of a multi-sector journey. What all the research shows is that many travellers - including those with the money to spend - are allocating more money to their accommodation and experiences at their destination rather than how they get there. So in that context, the premium may not be around for long, and I am sure that the SQ group planners have done the sums and found that the shrinking pool of those willing to pay a premium is outweighed by the larger market that may pay less but provide more revenue overall, while getting more upside from the lower costs of Scoot's operations.

And, as it is, those paying the extra for SilkAir are really getting an inferior product for a 'premium' carrier. The only difference for most passengers is that they don't have to pay for the meal from the cart, as they have already (over)paid for it in their ticket. You can still accommodate some of those pax through a codeshare, as SQ and TR do today, offering a few perks (complementary meal, bags) at a while lot less cost, while the LCC brand attracts new passengers and lifts the overall revenue of a route.

RawSushi wrote:

UPlog wrote:

As a pilot, I actually enjoy seeing Scoot's livery. The yellow is done well, not overly in your face like Spirit Airlines.

Also as a budget LCC, I think its branding is appropriate. Being quirky and bit childish seems to be the norm for carriers in the region which often use things like mascots, or seek to attract families with fun humorous marketing.

Agreed. Their new uniform is one of my favourites.

Often see a line of Scoot FAs in the HNL terminal. Striking wardrobe on very attractive FAs, usually walking single file. I'll miss them.

EmoticonsAllDay wrote:

Dreamflight767 wrote:

I thought Scoot and Silk were going to be combined to the SQ brand.

Only SilkAir will be absorbed into SIA for unifying the brand as it is an underwhelming product and SIA wants to deliver consistency across its services. Scoot will continue to be the budget arm of SIA.

Thank you.

EBT wrote:

juliuswong wrote:

EmoticonsAllDay wrote:

The destinations replaced with Scoot are mostly the least premium heavy as the routes previously sustained on tourist and leisure travellers than the business travellers even for SilkAir. They could always bring in the Dreamliners configured with ScootBiz if they had to which IMO is definitely better than SilkAir's current J.

This is where you are wrong. MI commands its own legion of premium pax who wouldn't mind to spend those extra dollars to get to their destinations by spending those few extra hundreds of dollars to "stay away from LCC crowd". A big chunk of these pax flown in via SQ and transfer to their holiday destinations for short getaway or long holidays. They seeks premium holiday package, not those "hipster-bunk bed" type. In addition, most of these smaller airports can't handle wide body such as 787 so bringing them into smaller regional route will be redundant and overkill for most regional routes.

That may be the case now, but is unlikely to stay that way in future. What we have seen globally, and are starting to see in SE Asia, is the commoditisation of short-haul routes. People are getting used to LCC style service on mainline carriers on short-haul routes, or as will happen here, using the LCC brand for the short part of a multi-sector journey. What all the research shows is that many travellers - including those with the money to spend - are allocating more money to their accommodation and experiences at their destination rather than how they get there. So in that context, the premium may not be around for long, and I am sure that the SQ group planners have done the sums and found that the shrinking pool of those willing to pay a premium is outweighed by the larger market that may pay less but provide more revenue overall, while getting more upside from the lower costs of Scoot's operations.

And, as it is, those paying the extra for SilkAir are really getting an inferior product for a 'premium' carrier. The only difference for most passengers is that they don't have to pay for the meal from the cart, as they have already (over)paid for it in their ticket. You can still accommodate some of those pax through a codeshare, as SQ and TR do today, offering a few perks (complementary meal, bags) at a while lot less cost, while the LCC brand attracts new passengers and lifts the overall revenue of a route.

I think the SQ Group airlines have studied their data very carefully before coming up with this list. It is quite obvious that those routes with the least amount of premium pax bookings are going to be the ones transferred to Scoot. These tend to be leisure routes where most pax are not travelling on business. The cost-benefit analysis is done and their route networks are now streamlined to help improve their bottom lines.

Do also note that these days, there is not such thing as a mutually exclusive business pax or LCC pax. Many a time, a pax who travels in J on a weekday flight may also be travelling on a LCC flight on the weekend. So there is quite a fair bit of overlap.

No surprises here as the SIA Group continues to move capacity to its lowest cost producer, and longhaul LCC rarely work--especially longhaul fifth freedom

avier wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

Though very similar to what QF has done - it merged Australian Airlines back into Qantas and ramped up Jetstar. I will stir the pot and say that SQ is perhaps 10-15 years behind QF...

Only if SQ had branded their LCC a bit better. Scoot is way too cartoonish and the colour theme a bit awful imo. JQ on the other hand seems more like a professional sounding LCC, and complements QF well.

Scoot is on the lines of other poorly branded LCC offshoots of other major airlines like Level, Joon, Swoop , etc.

I *HATE* the branding, especially the eye roll inducing garbage on their website about "fly[ing] like you’ve never flown before?" It presents an issue as SIA group shifts more capacity to Scoot, as plugging ever more TZ capacity into the SQ network is going to be a jarring combination.

mercure1 wrote:

Interesting move.

Yes seems like Scoot must be an attractive platform for SIA.

The mix of 737 and A320 on their certificate, however, will create some inefficiency. Wonder if this is short term solution, or if Scoot will be mixed fleet operator of narrowbodies?

unrave wrote:

How will this affect transfers? Can you connect between SQ and Scoot?

You can already transfer between Scoot and Singapore Airlines and SilkAir.

Aren't TZ and SQ on separate reservation systems?

I'm also wondering how long Air Asia X's KIX-HNL sector will last...

eta unknown wrote:

I'm also wondering how long Air Asia X's KIX-HNL sector will last...

They have done quite well - the Japanese are filling most of their KIX-HNL flights. As a result, they increased their frequency from 4X to 7X weekly in August 2018.

MaverickM11 wrote:

No surprises here as the SIA Group continues to move capacity to its lowest cost producer, and longhaul LCC rarely work--especially longhaul fifth freedom

avier wrote:

qf2220 wrote:

Though very similar to what QF has done - it merged Australian Airlines back into Qantas and ramped up Jetstar. I will stir the pot and say that SQ is perhaps 10-15 years behind QF...

Only if SQ had branded their LCC a bit better. Scoot is way too cartoonish and the colour theme a bit awful imo. JQ on the other hand seems more like a professional sounding LCC, and complements QF well.

Scoot is on the lines of other poorly branded LCC offshoots of other major airlines like Level, Joon, Swoop , etc.

I *HATE* the branding, especially the eye roll inducing garbage on their website about "fly[ing] like you’ve never flown before?" It presents an issue as SIA group shifts more capacity to Scoot, as plugging ever more TZ capacity into the SQ network is going to be a jarring combination.

mercure1 wrote:

Interesting move.

Yes seems like Scoot must be an attractive platform for SIA.

The mix of 737 and A320 on their certificate, however, will create some inefficiency. Wonder if this is short term solution, or if Scoot will be mixed fleet operator of narrowbodies?

unrave wrote:

How will this affect transfers? Can you connect between SQ and Scoot?

You can already transfer between Scoot and Singapore Airlines and SilkAir.

Aren't TZ and SQ on separate reservation systems?

You can book it on a single PNR. When traveling on Scoot flight with SQ ticket, you get free meals; free luggage; free seat selection; able to check through your luggage to final destination. Basically not much different when comparing to a SilkAir flight.

eta unknown wrote:

I'm also wondering how long Air Asia X's KIX-HNL sector will last...

Considering they boosted frequency, I would say well.

Air Asia X has a huge advantage versus Scoot as they teamed up with Japan's largest e-commerce company which sells holiday packages as part of its travel platform.

Scoot, on the other hand, must rely on a more direct business to consumer strategy to sell its seats without benefit of a local mega partner in Japan.

avier wrote:

Scoot is on the lines of other poorly branded LCC offshoots of other major airlines like Level, Joon, Swoop , etc.

Not to mention 'SCAT Airlines' ( ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCAT_Airlines )...

Would be interesting to see if Scoot would go for a GUM-KIX or GUM-SIN route. Really seems like there should be more leisure airlines on GUM-Japan than just the Korean ones about to launch GUM-KIX. Of course GUM sort of feels like the faded carpet club anymore, so maybe the demand just isn't there.

Seems transition is starting. Vientiane and Luang Prabang transition April 1st from Silk to Scoot.

At investor event, SIA announced they will seek to integrate the Silk into SQ starting "mid" 2020.

Also somewhat related, it was announced earlier in week that Silk 737MAX fleet will get Thompson lie-flat business seats also to align product to SQ.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ss-455652/

Silk Air brand integration continued. Silk website shut.

http://www.orientaviation.com/articles/ ... ir-website