dfw88 wrote:

UPlog wrote:

Lets see what the conditions are.

Remember last time airlines pulled their application since they did not like the Obama admin proposed conditions.

I think you're confusing the QF JV with the LATAM JV, which was indeed pulled because of the proposed conditions. Though, they were Chile's conditions, not from the US.

No, he’s correct they pulled the last application before it was formally denied.

JAAlbert wrote:

According to the OSC, QF/AA carry over 50% of the passengers between US/AUS and 54% of the non-stop traffic. The next largest carrier is Delta/Vigin at 18% and 32% for passengers vs nonstop passengers.

I am surprised DOT would allow the creation of such a juggernaut. I'm not convinced that this new beast will result in lower fares and better service based on what I've read of the OSC, but I need to study it more thoroughly. Your thoughts?

it will be interesting to see how Delta and United respond.

Most probably they will quietly accept it, since they are both beneficiaries/participants of multiple JV’s. Look at the NZ/UA, is that not a juggernaut as well per your standards?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So let me get this rough timeline of events straight -

AA/QF applied for a joint venture claiming that they needed the JV approved in order to launch new customer-friendly capacity. Interestingly enough, they launched that capacity (AA LAXSYD, AA LAXAKL, QF SFOSYD) without an approved joint venture under the (false) assumption that their JV would be approved. They said that if the JV wasn't approved that they would have to remove that new capacity.

The JV wasn't approved by the previous DOT... AA and QF left in their incremental capacity, and fares fell through the floor

Now, even though both AA and QF have proven that they in fact don't need a JV to sustain at least a degree of that capacity, their JV is approved?

Absolutely ridiculous.

Well JV will help they went from 77W to a 789 on SYD and AKL went to seasonal with JV we should see SYD go back to a 77W and AKL will go back year round maybe a AA dfw flight added

Congratulations to American Airlines and Qantas!

Hopefully LAX - MEL on AA metal soon!

JAAlbert wrote:

According to the OSC, QF/AA carry over 50% of the passengers between US/AUS and 54% of the non-stop traffic. The next largest carrier is Delta/Vigin at 18% and 32% for passengers vs nonstop passengers.

I am surprised DOT would allow the creation of such a juggernaut. I'm not convinced that this new beast will result in lower fares and better service based on what I've read of the OSC, but I need to study it more thoroughly. Your thoughts?

it will be interesting to see how Delta and United respond.

This is not specific routes but Airfare in general are at crazy low's. The general direction of air travel has been for crazy lower fares compared to 20-50 years ago etc....
Here's ALT average fares

" Fifty-three years ago, the average cost of a flight from Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport cost $41, or the equivalent of $323 in today’s dollars. According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), last year's average was $392."

https://www.business2community.com/trav ... s-01576832


I think these JV and the alliances all have done there job.

It's going through .. They remove one stipulation and it looks like they have a success. Congrats!!

With the Qantas joint venture now behind them, American should focus on LATAM, getting Aer Lingus to become part of the transatlantic joint venture with IAG and strengthening ties with China Southern.

grbauc wrote:

This is not specific routes but Airfare in general are at crazy low's. The general direction of air travel has been for crazy lower fares compared to 20-50 years ago etc....
Here's ALT average fares

" Fifty-three years ago, the average cost of a flight from Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport cost $41, or the equivalent of $323 in today’s dollars. According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), last year's average was $392."

https://www.business2community.com/trav ... s-01576832


I think these JV and the alliances all have done there job.

I don't know why you want to reference a single domestic airfare in a market that's been deregulated for more than 35 years to an international market that, due to size and distance, has limited natural competitors. (Oh, yeh, I do.)

MIflyer12 wrote:

grbauc wrote:

This is not specific routes but Airfare in general are at crazy low's. The general direction of air travel has been for crazy lower fares compared to 20-50 years ago etc....
Here's ALT average fares

" Fifty-three years ago, the average cost of a flight from Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport cost $41, or the equivalent of $323 in today’s dollars. According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), last year's average was $392."

https://www.business2community.com/trav ... s-01576832


I think these JV and the alliances all have done there job.

I don't know why you want to reference a single domestic airfare in a market that's been deregulated for more than 35 years to an international market that, due to size and distance, has limited natural competitors. (Oh, yeh, I do.)

I used it and the link has a generalization of the Industry has a Whole. JV and Alliances I believe have played that part. Domestic Fares are at 20 yr ago prices International will be close or below it. The general Trend show's this.

Not good news for customers, who likely face higher fares and reduced choices since the JV makes it easier for AA and Qantas to "rationalize" capacity. AA may cancel LAX-SYD, reduce frequency to less than daily, or make that route seasonal.

AA is not canceling LAX-SYD QF reduced theirs so AA would start theirs.....If anything it will go back to 77w

chepos wrote:

JAAlbert wrote:

According to the OSC, QF/AA carry over 50% of the passengers between US/AUS and 54% of the non-stop traffic. The next largest carrier is Delta/Vigin at 18% and 32% for passengers vs nonstop passengers.

I am surprised DOT would allow the creation of such a juggernaut. I'm not convinced that this new beast will result in lower fares and better service based on what I've read of the OSC, but I need to study it more thoroughly. Your thoughts?

it will be interesting to see how Delta and United respond.

Most probably they will quietly accept it, since they are both beneficiaries/participants of multiple JV’s. Look at the NZ/UA, is that not a juggernaut as well per your standards?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NZ/UA is only from NZ-US excludes Australia. I’m not sure if they applied for Australia aswell?

grbauc wrote:

MIflyer12 wrote:

grbauc wrote:

This is not specific routes but Airfare in general are at crazy low's. The general direction of air travel has been for crazy lower fares compared to 20-50 years ago etc....
Here's ALT average fares

" Fifty-three years ago, the average cost of a flight from Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport cost $41, or the equivalent of $323 in today’s dollars. According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), last year's average was $392."

https://www.business2community.com/trav ... s-01576832


I think these JV and the alliances all have done there job.

I don't know why you want to reference a single domestic airfare in a market that's been deregulated for more than 35 years to an international market that, due to size and distance, has limited natural competitors. (Oh, yeh, I do.)

I used it and the link has a generalization of the Industry has a Whole. JV and Alliances I believe have played that part. Domestic Fares are at 20 yr ago prices International will be close or below it. The general Trend show's this.

And specifically in this market the competition and competitive capacity has expanded significantly since the previous application in both the direct market and the indirect market via NZ, Fiji and Asia if you're from the West Coast. An immunised j/v between QF and AA really won't shift the dial in any significant way on the current balance and, hopefully, means QF can start some more DFW service or try out an ORD service.

JAAlbert wrote:

According to the OSC, QF/AA carry over 50% of the passengers between US/AUS and 54% of the non-stop traffic. The next largest carrier is Delta/Vigin at 18% and 32% for passengers vs nonstop passengers.

I am surprised DOT would allow the creation of such a juggernaut. I'm not convinced that this new beast will result in lower fares and better service based on what I've read of the OSC, but I need to study it more thoroughly. Your thoughts?

Well, it's not like there is a lot of carriers serving the US-Australasia market to begin with, so what does it matter?

If this were to a huge area like Europe or Asia, it'd be different, but dare I say US-Australasia is, while growing, still fairly niche market compared to the other continents.

I'm fine with AA having another dominant jv. Other than their BA jv, they don't have much else going for them in the international market.

Qantas Press Release: https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... -business/

BNE-ORD/SFO seems to be the first two routes.

As part of the case put to the DOT, Qantas and American flagged an intention to launch several new routes within the first two years of the proposed joint business. Qantas expects to announce details of two new routes – Brisbane-Chicago and Brisbane-San Francisco – once final approval is received.

A bit surprised AA hasn't released anything yet...

Spoke too soon.

AA Press Release: http://news.aa.com/news/news-details/20 ... fault.aspx

Same info it looks like. QF launching BNE-SFO/ORD once approval is finalized.

Ishrion wrote:

Qantas Press Release: https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... -business/

BNE-ORD/SFO seems to be the first two routes.

As part of the case put to the DOT, Qantas and American flagged an intention to launch several new routes within the first two years of the proposed joint business. Qantas expects to announce details of two new routes – Brisbane-Chicago and Brisbane-San Francisco – once final approval is received.

A bit surprised AA hasn't released anything yet...

What about DFW-BNE or MEL?

Fargo wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

Qantas Press Release: https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... -business/

BNE-ORD/SFO seems to be the first two routes.

As part of the case put to the DOT, Qantas and American flagged an intention to launch several new routes within the first two years of the proposed joint business. Qantas expects to announce details of two new routes – Brisbane-Chicago and Brisbane-San Francisco – once final approval is received.

A bit surprised AA hasn't released anything yet...

What about DFW-BNE or MEL?

AA will possibly announce DFW-BNE/MEL a bit later. Just a note, Dallas and Fort Worth mayors coming to BNE/SYD in next few days to discuss tourism and air services.

Fargo wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

Qantas Press Release: https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... -business/

BNE-ORD/SFO seems to be the first two routes.

As part of the case put to the DOT, Qantas and American flagged an intention to launch several new routes within the first two years of the proposed joint business. Qantas expects to announce details of two new routes – Brisbane-Chicago and Brisbane-San Francisco – once final approval is received.

A bit surprised AA hasn't released anything yet...

What about DFW-BNE or MEL?

Nothing on that it seems. However, these two routes will be operated by Qantas, since they're announcing it themselves.

I'd say give it a bit more time before AA announces something for the Winter season. They've got spare 787s lying around.

Fargo wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

Qantas Press Release: https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... -business/

BNE-ORD/SFO seems to be the first two routes.

As part of the case put to the DOT, Qantas and American flagged an intention to launch several new routes within the first two years of the proposed joint business. Qantas expects to announce details of two new routes – Brisbane-Chicago and Brisbane-San Francisco – once final approval is received.

A bit surprised AA hasn't released anything yet...

What about DFW-BNE or MEL?

Seems more likely that there won’t be a BNE-DFW if there is a BNE-ORD on the horizon.

With QF likely to announce BNE-ORD and BNE-SFO, it’s likely that it could well be something more like 3 weekly to each.

AA’s announcements would be separate, but I can’t see them being able to operate a route the length of MEL-DFW in their configuration. QF’s 789 seems to be optimised for those longer haul routes.

Whether or not AA does launch MEL from LAX will be interesting, even if it’s a seasonal addition.

JAAlbert wrote:

According to the OSC, QF/AA carry over 50% of the passengers between US/AUS and 54% of the non-stop traffic. The next largest carrier is Delta/Vigin at 18% and 32% for passengers vs nonstop passengers.

I am surprised DOT would allow the creation of such a juggernaut. I'm not convinced that this new beast will result in lower fares and better service based on what I've read of the OSC, but I need to study it more thoroughly. Your thoughts?

it will be interesting to see how Delta and United respond.

Related but slightly OT, IMO I don't think the DL/VA will respond much (if it all), but it does keep an eye on DL whether if they are still looking at either the EY, HNA or SQ stakes in VA considering all 3 parties have looked at selling out at one point.

If DL still considers TransPac as "moderately" important, they will likely want VA to do the bulk of the work in the JV. Regardless if DL ends up buying a stake in VA in the future or not.

IndianicWorld wrote:

Fargo wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

Qantas Press Release: https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... -business/

BNE-ORD/SFO seems to be the first two routes.



A bit surprised AA hasn't released anything yet...

What about DFW-BNE or MEL?

Seems more likely that there won’t be a BNE-DFW if there is a BNE-ORD on the horizon.

With QF likely to announce BNE-ORD and BNE-SFO, it’s likely that it could well be something more like 3 weekly to each.

AA’s announcements would be separate, but I can’t see them being able to operate a route the length of MEL-DFW in their configuration. QF’s 789 seems to be optimised for those longer haul routes.

Whether or not AA does launch MEL from LAX will be interesting, even if it’s a seasonal addition.

I agree we probably won’t see MEL/BNE-DFW yet if BNE-ORD comes along, BNE-SFO makes sense given the reduction ex SYD with the 789 replacing the 744 and the West Coast is a large market and no UA ex BNE.

How about DFW-AKL on AA? There was mention somewhere of 1 new route for AA initially and 2 for QF. LAX-AKL back to year round, not sure if they need the 77W ex SYD?

I could see atleast seasonal AA LAX-MEL/BNE replacing.

JAAlbert wrote:

According to the OSC, QF/AA carry over 50% of the passengers between US/AUS and 54% of the non-stop traffic. The next largest carrier is Delta/Vigin at 18% and 32% for passengers vs nonstop passengers.

I am surprised DOT would allow the creation of such a juggernaut. I'm not convinced that this new beast will result in lower fares and better service based on what I've read of the OSC, but I need to study it more thoroughly. Your thoughts?

it will be interesting to see how Delta and United respond.

Lower prices no, but new services, definitely. And personally I think that's enough reason to approve the JV.

I'm surprised how lax the conditions are. The two airlines are to perform a self assessment on the results of the JV on competition in 7 years, and submit their report. That's it. Pretty tame.

Nevertheless, I very much welcome this JV. Potentially MEL-DFW will now be on the cards, as well as other services once project sunrise starts. I think it will lead to new non-stop connections, which is great.

VA is in no financial position to respond in any manner, and Delta and United don't care that much about Australasia. There will still be competition on the trunk routes such as LAX which will provide a natural price ceiling for passengers who don't mind an extra stop.

NZ has the rights to fly Aus-US, and has done so in the past. Now that they don't have a relationship with VA anymore, they could potentially come back to the Aus market in their own right and make it work in conjunction with their JV with UA. But that requires significant capital expenditure and Luxon is a very conservative executive and I don't see that happening.

ZK-NBT wrote:

I could see atleast seasonal AA LAX-MEL/BNE replacing.

I could see QF reducing both MEL and BNE to daily, with AA picking up the slack with a daily flight to each (in which case a 77W to SYD might be overkill.)

Qantas launching Brisbane to SFO and Brisbane to Chicago on the 787-9

tcaeyx wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

I could see atleast seasonal AA LAX-MEL/BNE replacing.

I could see QF reducing both MEL and BNE to daily, with AA picking up the slack with a daily flight to each (in which case a 77W to SYD might be overkill.)

With QF now launching 2 new routes from BNE, wouldn't it be overkill to see AA go daily on BNE-LAX? Seeing that pax heading to SFO can now take the direct flight and pax transiting to the east coast can now fly viaORD.

Isn’t the approval only tentative at this stage? Any idea when it will be finalised - and formal route announcements?

I suspect we won’t see a full reshuffle until there is a formal announcement, intent to serve new routes would seem acceptable whilst approval is tentative - then capacity reshuffle to follow once final approval given.

tcaeyx wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

I could see atleast seasonal AA LAX-MEL/BNE replacing.

I could see QF reducing both MEL and BNE to daily, with AA picking up the slack with a daily flight to each (in which case a 77W to SYD might be overkill.)

Agree once formal final approval is given, I’d see QF drop their 789 MEL-LAX and AA replace, question is could QF then open up MEl-DFW? That would give them their three new routes mentioned several times - BNE-SFO/ORD, MEL-DFW.

Initial plan i've heard is QF - BNE-SFO and BNE-ORD, AA MEL-LAX replacing the QF95-96 and making it daily.

kriskim wrote:

tcaeyx wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

I could see atleast seasonal AA LAX-MEL/BNE replacing.

I could see QF reducing both MEL and BNE to daily, with AA picking up the slack with a daily flight to each (in which case a 77W to SYD might be overkill.)

With QF now launching 2 new routes from BNE, wouldn't it be overkill to see AA go daily on BNE-LAX? Seeing that pax heading to SFO can now take the direct flight and pax transiting to the east coast can now fly viaORD.

Not necessarily. BNE-LAX is a large market and QF flies 10 times per week while VA flies 6pw on the 77W. So I can see QF reducing down service to daily with AA picking 3 per week to start with. That makes room for 3 QF BNE-SFO services per week while the 789 currently assigned to HKG flying will re-deploy back to Brisbane for ORD. (HKG can easily be done by A380/A330 combo's in any case) So that makes sense.

What will be really interesting is whether we now see a follow on 789 order from QF once final authorisation is granted. Given the expansion they have flagged they will likely need them!

The yields ex-BNE wouldn't be strong enough for the extra LAX flying (the existing QF55/56) on top of the proposed QF BNE-ORD/SFO expansions.

Reducing BNE-LAX back to daily once ORD/SFO comes online would improve yields for QF considering some of the existing BNE-LAX traffic would be moved to SFO/ORD to connect into the AS or AA hubs there respectively.

At most AA would fly the extra x3 BNE-LAX on a seasonal-basis during the school holidays (unclear whether if it's Northern or Summer holiday seasons), not year round.

log0008 wrote:

Initial plan i've heard is QF - BNE-SFO and BNE-ORD, AA MEL-LAX replacing the QF95-96 and making it daily.

Would make sense, as it may also allow for MEL-SFO to also be increased.

Really not sure there is year round demand for 2 x daily QF/AA on MEL-LAX though, especially with one of those being the A380. Seasonal increases by AA yes, but it would likely be less than daily for much of the year.

Adding 2 more flights on MEL-SFO and the AA flights on MEL-LAX would be a capacity upgrade overall which would be good.

I do wonder though if they may well look at something like a MEL-BNE-ORD routing, increasing the flexibility of the aircraft across the bases, given that LAX QF 789 flights would likely be reducing.

log0008 wrote:

Initial plan i've heard is QF - BNE-SFO and BNE-ORD, AA MEL-LAX replacing the QF95-96 and making it daily.

I’ve heard 3 new routes and increasing existing routes of which as you say would be QF BNE-SFO/ORD 3-4 weekly each while reducing LAX to daily.

MEL-LAX isn’t a new route but I can definitely see AA doing it with as you say QF reducing MEL-LAX to daily, with AA also on BNE-LAX, I’m going 5 weekly each initially to MEL/BNE which is 3 aircraft for them.

As for a third new route AA doing AKL-DFW is what I can see, It has been mentioned before, MEL-DFW is a real stretch of the aircrafts capability or DFW-MEL atleast, I feel it will wait for Project sunrise.

IndianicWorld wrote:

log0008 wrote:

Initial plan i've heard is QF - BNE-SFO and BNE-ORD, AA MEL-LAX replacing the QF95-96 and making it daily.

Would make sense, as it may also allow for MEL-SFO to also be increased.

Really not sure there is year round demand for 2 x daily QF/AA on MEL-LAX though, especially with one of those being the A380. Seasonal increases by AA yes, but it would likely be less than daily for much of the year.

Adding 2 more flights on MEL-SFO and the AA flights on MEL-LAX would be a capacity upgrade overall which would be good.

I do wonder though if they may well look at something like a MEL-BNE-ORD routing, increasing the flexibility of the aircraft across the bases, given that LAX QF 789 flights would likely be reducing.

I could see QF dropping the additional MEL-LAX flying in favour of AA on a 3-7 weekly basis, depending on season. Possibly QF could reshuffle MEL-SFO to 6x weekly, but I am not sure what the demand is like to SFO on the current service. There will be a lot of new capacity to be absorbed across the pacific when this all goes ahead. Disappointing that MEL-DFW not going ahead yet!

It’s BNE and PER’s time to shine with the 789, MEL and SYD will get their turn with Project Sunrise.

QF742 wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

log0008 wrote:

Initial plan i've heard is QF - BNE-SFO and BNE-ORD, AA MEL-LAX replacing the QF95-96 and making it daily.

Would make sense, as it may also allow for MEL-SFO to also be increased.

Really not sure there is year round demand for 2 x daily QF/AA on MEL-LAX though, especially with one of those being the A380. Seasonal increases by AA yes, but it would likely be less than daily for much of the year.

Adding 2 more flights on MEL-SFO and the AA flights on MEL-LAX would be a capacity upgrade overall which would be good.

I do wonder though if they may well look at something like a MEL-BNE-ORD routing, increasing the flexibility of the aircraft across the bases, given that LAX QF 789 flights would likely be reducing.

I could see QF dropping the additional MEL-LAX flying in favour of AA on a 3-7 weekly basis, depending on season. Possibly QF could reshuffle MEL-SFO to 6x weekly, but I am not sure what the demand is like to SFO on the current service. There will be a lot of new capacity to be absorbed across the pacific when this all goes ahead. Disappointing that MEL-DFW not going ahead yet!

I do tend to think that MEL-DFW is a stretch for the 789, even in QF’s configuration to operate this optimally. Certain times of the year on the DFW-MEL leg would likely be a significant challenge.

MEL-SFO will also having UA on the route later this year, which will be interesting to see how that has an effect on QF’s loads.

I do agree though that the Australia-USA routes are certainly experiencing some headwinds, with the lower AUD affecting Australian outbound demand and a need for the US travelers to fill some of that gap. The amount of capacity is being managed by airlines, with seasonal schedule changes becoming more common.

IndianicWorld wrote:

QF742 wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

Would make sense, as it may also allow for MEL-SFO to also be increased.

Really not sure there is year round demand for 2 x daily QF/AA on MEL-LAX though, especially with one of those being the A380. Seasonal increases by AA yes, but it would likely be less than daily for much of the year.

Adding 2 more flights on MEL-SFO and the AA flights on MEL-LAX would be a capacity upgrade overall which would be good.

I do wonder though if they may well look at something like a MEL-BNE-ORD routing, increasing the flexibility of the aircraft across the bases, given that LAX QF 789 flights would likely be reducing.

I could see QF dropping the additional MEL-LAX flying in favour of AA on a 3-7 weekly basis, depending on season. Possibly QF could reshuffle MEL-SFO to 6x weekly, but I am not sure what the demand is like to SFO on the current service. There will be a lot of new capacity to be absorbed across the pacific when this all goes ahead. Disappointing that MEL-DFW not going ahead yet!

I do tend to think that MEL-DFW is a stretch for the 789, even in QF’s configuration to operate this optimally. Certain times of the year on the DFW-MEL leg would likely be a significant challenge.

MEL-SFO will also having UA on the route later this year, which will be interesting to see how that has an effect on QF’s loads.

I do agree though that the Australia-USA routes are certainly experiencing some headwinds, with the lower AUD affecting Australian outbound demand and a need for the US travelers to fill some of that gap. The amount of capacity is being managed by airlines, with seasonal schedule changes becoming more common.

According to gcmap.com, DFW-MEL and BNE-ORD is fairly identical in terms of distance... a mere 19 miles off. If BNE-ORD can work, I can’t figure why DFW-MEL can’t, at least technically.
The real issue against DFW-MEL is more likely marginal demand, various alternatives and favor over existing QF7/8 flight.

Historically speaking, just how much does a JV boost traffic to let both airlines start routes that wouldn't be served before?

Detroit313 wrote:

With the Qantas joint venture now behind them, American should focus on LATAM, getting Aer Lingus to become part of the transatlantic joint venture with IAG and strengthening ties with China Southern.

Totally agree. South America and Europe is the core international routes for AA, and securing every ally they have is vital. They can also totally utilize their new mainland Chinese ally to offer connectivity to niches that CX doesn’t cover (where there are many)

After AA gets its additional 787s in, would be be shocked to see LAX-BNE/MEL go 3/4 per week off season (when 787s will do seasonal TATL) and daily peak. I'm very interested to see I'd DFW-AKL seasonal happens.

I now have had confirmation AA will launch MEL-LAX 3 weekly increasing to 5 weekly in peak seasons. This will replace QF95/96. Announcement to be made immediately after JV is officially approved.

log0008 wrote:

I now have had confirmation AA will launch MEL-LAX 3 weekly increasing to 5 weekly in peak seasons. This will replace QF95/96. Announcement to be made immediately after JV is officially approved.

You’re saying MEL airport is your source... well it sounds logical at least. Hope you’re right.

The DOT did the right thing.

Not really surprising on this approval, and glad to see it!

Strengthens OW across the board. And for the LATAM JV - IMO, just a matter of time before final approval, as sure the powers that be are working with Chile on conditions. As dfw88 stated - not US conditions, but from Chile.

oskarclare wrote:

Fargo wrote:

Ishrion wrote:

Qantas Press Release: https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... -business/

BNE-ORD/SFO seems to be the first two routes.



A bit surprised AA hasn't released anything yet...

What about DFW-BNE or MEL?

AA will possibly announce DFW-BNE/MEL a bit later. Just a note, Dallas and Fort Worth mayors coming to BNE/SYD in next few days to discuss tourism and air services.

With AA confit DFW-BNE on their metal is slim

With AA replacing MEL-LAX does that mean that’s QF flight will be moved to DFW?

Qantas and AA will own the US - Australia market.

With that behind, AA should now focus on their relationship with China Southern and LATAM.

They should also figure out how to make their JV with Japan Airlines more profitable.

Planes4you wrote:

With AA replacing MEL-LAX does that mean that’s QF flight will be moved to DFW?

I believe that aircraft will be freed up to do BNE-ORD/SFO according to the QF memo

SonaSounds wrote:

Planes4you wrote:

With AA replacing MEL-LAX does that mean that’s QF flight will be moved to DFW?

I believe that aircraft will be freed up to do BNE-ORD/SFO according to the QF memo

I don’t think the “memo” suggests anything about that. No announcements about frequency have been made. I doubt either will be daily. So it’s hard to say at this point how much metal will need to be committed to these new routes.