A bit of well-placed gossip about VA international, which no I can't substantiate, but comes from sources who would know.
A lot of bitterness between HNA and VA right now. It was expected Hong Kong Airlines would market and fill the HKG flights but VA feels they've been completely 'screwed over' (screw not the word used). HNA & Hong Kong Airlines have completely lost interest in Australia.
Without HNA & Hong Kong Airlines ability to fill ex HKG, combined with CX & QF price dumping and VA's inability to capture market share losses could reach eight figures (from launch). The A330's need to be flown somewhere so they'll stick with it for now and are aiming for c.30 extra pax per flight from the proposed VS JV, up from 5-6 pax per flight today. There's a belief VS can deliver most of that uplift in the form of 'premium leisure' tourists ex UK (which I can sort of believe). If it goes ahead VS will put the A350 on LHR-HKG. VS commercial is cynical as they're allegedly unhappy that VA doesn't have Premium Economy to HKG and that this may be a problem.
VS have no intention of flying to PER, that's just SRB making stuff up for publicity.
LAX is apparently working well enough for VA and DL with no major changes likely.
Scurrah allegedly doesn't believe in the virtual network strategy because he feels it fails to give VA enough control over pricing.
Tigerair's focus is trying to get their house in order. Their 737 transition is back on track with the new pilot deal, fewer routes but increased capacity on those which stay, with a commercial focus on 'urban millennials' who typically don't engage with credit cards & loyalty reward schemes like Velocity. Some of the medium-haul international routes (think the islands) might move over to Tiger because of their lower cost base, but not until Tiger domestic has been stabilized with no specific plans just yet.
I can't personally vouch for any of this, but the insight is from well-placed people.
Every single observation you raise seems eminently logical.
I am not surprised in the slightest that HKG has been a financial disaster, after all fares have crashed since they entered the market and they are the weakest competitor against CX and QF who are both entrenched in the market. I would be concerned though if they think VS feed is going to help turn things around in HKG.
Firstly, the connections on the SYD/MEL-HKG-LHR sectors are over 6 hours. When there are so many convenient options from Australia to London this would only be attractive to someone looking for a stopover in HKG anyway or very price conscious traffic. Even Velocity members are unlikely to choose VA when EY and SQ offer significantly better optoons. Second, the lack of Premium Economy is a good point. People might be more willing to accept the long connection for a good deal in Premium, but they have closed themself off from that somewhat lucrative source of passengers. Thirdly, while fares between Australia and Hong Kong are trash, between Australia and UK are hardly any better. The likes of QR have added so much capacity that fares have been pushed to unsustainably low levels.
In short, while they talk about 'premium leisure', on account of the terrible schedules at present I really can't imagine why anyone would attach a 'premium' to flying VS/VA, and ultimately they will end of chasing QR and BI for the lowest yield passengers.
On the flipside, I'm not surprised that LAX is doing 'well enough'. Statements from VA had always led me believe that LAX was breakeven-to-sligntly-profitable, but I've read several posts over recent months where people have said that it must be loss making. That confused me as, from my perspective, VA have never said anything publically that gave rise to that inference. The route is definitely not a runaway success, but 'good enough' seems to sum it up well.