Does anyone know why QF is “marketing” that PER-FCO commences Saturday the 25th when it actually launched on Wednesday? Just seems so bizarre they are completely ignoring the fact the flight already operated.

ben175 wrote:

Does anyone know why QF is “marketing” that PER-FCO commences Saturday the 25th when it actually launched on Wednesday? Just seems so bizarre they are completely ignoring the fact the flight already operated.

I was under the impression it was a points flight to lure its well healed FF to burn some points. saw on another site, J was around 105.000 + taxes

an767

ben175 wrote:

PER-CGK I definitely did not expect, but makes complete sense with GA absent from the route. I wonder if we could see QF return to PER-DPS? There's definitely a high end market willing to pay a premium for J.

Doubt we've seen the last of ex-DPS announcements. PER for example was running up to around 10x daily to DPS in 2019 which included a GA A333 in peak-season. JQ are currently charging $650 for many morning departures in August from PER - outrageous.

BA941 wrote:

What’s not correct? When QF swapped QF1 and QF9 to being via Singapore and Perth respectively in lieu of Dubai they introduced the A380 on QF35 from Melbourne to allow transfers to QF1 and maintain a first class option from Melbourne

If you are querying the QF5 flight number it’s origins date back to 1974 on flights to Rome. At that time Frankfurt was still served on the London flights on about 4 days of the week, so QF1 was the flight number to Frankfurt

Just re-reading your other post now, indeed I thought the “it” at the beginning of the first paragraph referred to the 5/6 flight numbers as this was the whole point of that discussion and your explanation on its history (which I do not question). I see now you were just referring to the A380 though - my mistake & apologies.

qf789 wrote:

PER-LHR is seeing stronger demand than pre Covid, a350 to replace 789 on the route when they arrive, AJ said PER-LHR is here to stay once Sunrise flights take off
The A220/A321XLR coming online will open up opportunities to HKG, Vietnam and India

I'm starting to wonder how soon there will be a follow order for the A350?

How far would and A321XL be able to travel from PER? At a guess I'd think that HKG and Vietnam is within reach.

Lastly, it seems like at A223 will be liveried in as QF mainline. Does that suggest that only the A221 will be QF Link or could there be a mix?

Cheers

Will SYD-JNB stay on 4 weekly, or will it still increase now that PER-JNB is starting?

tullamarine wrote:

angusjt wrote:

Perth to Jakarta is a fun one, any word on Garuda resuming the route themselves? I can't recall seeing one of their planes at PER in the last few months

Garuda has only reactivated about 1/4 of their fleet with most AU routes except SYD-CGK still not flying. If you visit CGK, you see parked GA planes everywhere.

I do not understand QF's comments about waiting to increase PER-CGK until they get more slots. As someone who visits CGK regularly, I can honestly say there is plenty of gate capacity available with the terminal pretty empty even during the evening peak.

I've flown PER-CGK in the past on JQ and remember it having a ghastly departure time... if QF is the only carrier on the route how important is the perfect slot though?

qf789 wrote:

On top of the PER announcements Qantas has provided a market update today

Domestic flights across the group will be cut another 5% on top of the already 10% announced last month for July and August to combat rising fuel prices
Even with cuts the groups domestic flying is above 100% pre covid

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... june-2022/

Anyone else think a return of the dreaded fuel surcharges is on the horizon? Wondering if fuel stays high (or even climbs) then increased fares will only cover so much before it becomes so high that it would be better from a marketing point of view to have lower "fares" but slap a surcharge on?

bjwonline wrote:

qf789 wrote:

On top of the PER announcements Qantas has provided a market update today

Domestic flights across the group will be cut another 5% on top of the already 10% announced last month for July and August to combat rising fuel prices
Even with cuts the groups domestic flying is above 100% pre covid

https://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media ... june-2022/

Anyone else think a return of the dreaded fuel surcharges is on the horizon? Wondering if fuel stays high (or even climbs) then increased fares will only cover so much before it becomes so high that it would be better from a marketing point of view to have lower "fares" but slap a surcharge on?

Funny you mention that. I noticed on Wednesday that Lufthansa Group have reintroduced them. They removed them around 2016 or 2017 IIRC.

I'd be as certain to say yes on fuel surcharge. QF and VA won't miss the chance of another cash cow opportunity.

So just on QF. We've seen some pretty low points recently in its management of:

1. Customer affairs - call centre times, DFW, calling customers not match fit
2. The unlawful sacking of 2k people during the pandemic
3. outsourcing of all ground handling jobs
4. Downgrade of service on board and on ground
5. Depature times and arrivals now lower than that of Jetstar.

While the order of new metal (sunrise and project winton) is exciting, it means that QF long term will see changes in its domestic product, but more importantly its international arm will see a massive capacity reduction. And I say reduction based on the 230-240 seat capacities on its mainstays the 789 and a35K fleet, with the 330's and 380s being retired long term.

So the cheapening of domestic, customer dissatisfaction and hobbling of qantas international capacity raise issues longer term on cashflow and market share? If there's less QF seats overseas is the name able to justify spending the coin to get on a direct flight?

Can see a more focussed VA picking off market share domestically on the basis of customer dissatisfaction and qf international seeing reductions in volume as the seats on their planes will be more expensive. In other words - do you really want to fly qantas? Is it objectively worth the premium and positioning currently?

discuss.

Qf648 wrote:

I'd be as certain to say yes on fuel surcharge. QF and VA won't miss the chance of another cash cow opportunity.

So just on QF. We've seen some pretty low points recently in its management of:

1. Customer affairs - call centre times, DFW, calling customers not match fit
2. The unlawful sacking of 2k people during the pandemic
3. outsourcing of all ground handling jobs
4. Downgrade of service on board and on ground
5. Depature times and arrivals now lower than that of Jetstar.

While the order of new metal (sunrise and project winton) is exciting, it means that QF long term will see changes in its domestic product, but more importantly its international arm will see a massive capacity reduction. And I say reduction based on the 230-240 seat capacities on its mainstays the 789 and a35K fleet, with the 330's and 380s being retired long term.

So the cheapening of domestic, customer dissatisfaction and hobbling of qantas international capacity raise issues longer term on cashflow and market share? If there's less QF seats overseas is the name able to justify spending the coin to get on a direct flight?

Can see a more focussed VA picking off market share domestically on the basis of customer dissatisfaction and qf international seeing reductions in volume as the seats on their planes will be more expensive. In other words - do you really want to fly qantas? Is it objectively worth the premium and positioning currently?

discuss.

Just incorporate any fuel surcharge into the fare - it’s the honest and straightforward way to deal with consumers, who HATE apparently disguised surcharges. In any event, fares are so fluid that a surcharge is effectively meaningless. Costs (ie fuel) go up - therefore fares follow suit. Costs decline - reduce your fares. Simple.

Qf648 wrote:

I'd be as certain to say yes on fuel surcharge. QF and VA won't miss the chance of another cash cow opportunity.

So just on QF. We've seen some pretty low points recently in its management of:

1. Customer affairs - call centre times, DFW, calling customers not match fit
2. The unlawful sacking of 2k people during the pandemic
3. outsourcing of all ground handling jobs
4. Downgrade of service on board and on ground
5. Depature times and arrivals now lower than that of Jetstar.

While the order of new metal (sunrise and project winton) is exciting, it means that QF long term will see changes in its domestic product, but more importantly its international arm will see a massive capacity reduction. And I say reduction based on the 230-240 seat capacities on its mainstays the 789 and a35K fleet, with the 330's and 380s being retired long term.

So the cheapening of domestic, customer dissatisfaction and hobbling of qantas international capacity raise issues longer term on cashflow and market share? If there's less QF seats overseas is the name able to justify spending the coin to get on a direct flight?

Can see a more focussed VA picking off market share domestically on the basis of customer dissatisfaction and qf international seeing reductions in volume as the seats on their planes will be more expensive. In other words - do you really want to fly qantas? Is it objectively worth the premium and positioning currently?

discuss.

It seems like you’re looking for a pile on. So, no.

If you’re think VA don’t have issues like QF at the moment, you’re sadly mistaken.

Qf648 wrote:

I'd be as certain to say yes on fuel surcharge. QF and VA won't miss the chance of another cash cow opportunity.

How would a fuel surcharge be a "cash cow opportunity"? Australian Consumer Law requires the total price to be made clear at all stages of the purchasing process, so a fuel surcharge, however that might be implemented, would look no different to the consumer than simply raising the fare by the same amount.

getluv wrote:

Qf648 wrote:

I'd be as certain to say yes on fuel surcharge. QF and VA won't miss the chance of another cash cow opportunity.

So just on QF. We've seen some pretty low points recently in its management of:

1. Customer affairs - call centre times, DFW, calling customers not match fit
2. The unlawful sacking of 2k people during the pandemic
3. outsourcing of all ground handling jobs
4. Downgrade of service on board and on ground
5. Depature times and arrivals now lower than that of Jetstar.

While the order of new metal (sunrise and project winton) is exciting, it means that QF long term will see changes in its domestic product, but more importantly its international arm will see a massive capacity reduction. And I say reduction based on the 230-240 seat capacities on its mainstays the 789 and a35K fleet, with the 330's and 380s being retired long term.

So the cheapening of domestic, customer dissatisfaction and hobbling of qantas international capacity raise issues longer term on cashflow and market share? If there's less QF seats overseas is the name able to justify spending the coin to get on a direct flight?

Can see a more focussed VA picking off market share domestically on the basis of customer dissatisfaction and qf international seeing reductions in volume as the seats on their planes will be more expensive. In other words - do you really want to fly qantas? Is it objectively worth the premium and positioning currently?

discuss.

It seems like you’re looking for a pile on. So, no.

If you’re think VA don’t have issues like QF at the moment, you’re sadly mistaken.

Yeah but Virgin charges less, doesn't claim to be a premium carrier while stripping service but charging the "premium" price, hasn't got a lock on the corproate market that means a lot of business flyers are stuck experiencing the current QF, isn't overtly blaming passengers for its woes, and though it's also having issues, less so than Qantas (cancellation rate of approx 5% vs 8%).

The ultimate question posed is a fair one - is Qantas worth the premium? And right now the answer for many is proving to be... no.

Don’t doubt virgin is having issues but in 12 months I think we could see them tearing chunks out of qf’s market share.

And that’s bad for Qf as domestic is the cash cow

getluv wrote:

Qf648 wrote:

I'd be as certain to say yes on fuel surcharge. QF and VA won't miss the chance of another cash cow opportunity.

So just on QF. We've seen some pretty low points recently in its management of:

1. Customer affairs - call centre times, DFW, calling customers not match fit
2. The unlawful sacking of 2k people during the pandemic
3. outsourcing of all ground handling jobs
4. Downgrade of service on board and on ground
5. Depature times and arrivals now lower than that of Jetstar.

While the order of new metal (sunrise and project winton) is exciting, it means that QF long term will see changes in its domestic product, but more importantly its international arm will see a massive capacity reduction. And I say reduction based on the 230-240 seat capacities on its mainstays the 789 and a35K fleet, with the 330's and 380s being retired long term.

So the cheapening of domestic, customer dissatisfaction and hobbling of qantas international capacity raise issues longer term on cashflow and market share? If there's less QF seats overseas is the name able to justify spending the coin to get on a direct flight?

Can see a more focussed VA picking off market share domestically on the basis of customer dissatisfaction and qf international seeing reductions in volume as the seats on their planes will be more expensive. In other words - do you really want to fly qantas? Is it objectively worth the premium and positioning currently?

discuss.

It seems like you’re looking for a pile on. So, no.

If you’re think VA don’t have issues like QF at the moment, you’re sadly mistaken.

Not a pile on but legitimate discussion on where we see our two major carriers in 12 months.

qf789 wrote:

Qantas SYD-SFO still starting on 30 Oct 22 however planned 6 weekly has been reduced to 5 weekly, from 27 Jan to 8 Mar 23 will be further reduced to 4 weekly

SYD-DFW will be reduced from 7 to 5 weekly from 30 Jan to 5 Mar 23

https://aeroroutes.com/eng/220624-qfnw22syd

This reduced flying is most likely due to fleet shortage. An equivalent of 2 return per each route is nearly 8 days of 789 flying!
When will the last 3 789s arrive on property? Not having them is really holding back the Qantas network recovery.

rfarlz wrote:

Qf648 wrote:

I'd be as certain to say yes on fuel surcharge. QF and VA won't miss the chance of another cash cow opportunity.

How would a fuel surcharge be a "cash cow opportunity"? Australian Consumer Law requires the total price to be made clear at all stages of the purchasing process, so a fuel surcharge, however that might be implemented, would look no different to the consumer than simply raising the fare by the same amount.

One example, from a travel agent perspective, only the fare pays commission, surcharges do not.
The more an airline cuts out of the total cost and calls a surcharge, the less they have to pay commission on.

Is it the total answer: no, but it’s a piece of the larger puzzle.

NZ516 wrote:

This reduced flying is most likely due to fleet shortage. An equivalent of 2 return per each route is nearly 8 days of 789 flying!
When will the last 3 789s arrive on property? Not having them is really holding back the Qantas network recovery.

Some time in Q4 is the best estimate given Boeing is hoping to receive clearance to recommence deliveries soon and then there is a backlog of rework, some FAA inspection and delivery.

aerokiwi wrote:

getluv wrote:

Qf648 wrote:

I'd be as certain to say yes on fuel surcharge. QF and VA won't miss the chance of another cash cow opportunity.

So just on QF. We've seen some pretty low points recently in its management of:

1. Customer affairs - call centre times, DFW, calling customers not match fit
2. The unlawful sacking of 2k people during the pandemic
3. outsourcing of all ground handling jobs
4. Downgrade of service on board and on ground
5. Depature times and arrivals now lower than that of Jetstar.

While the order of new metal (sunrise and project winton) is exciting, it means that QF long term will see changes in its domestic product, but more importantly its international arm will see a massive capacity reduction. And I say reduction based on the 230-240 seat capacities on its mainstays the 789 and a35K fleet, with the 330's and 380s being retired long term.

So the cheapening of domestic, customer dissatisfaction and hobbling of qantas international capacity raise issues longer term on cashflow and market share? If there's less QF seats overseas is the name able to justify spending the coin to get on a direct flight?

Can see a more focussed VA picking off market share domestically on the basis of customer dissatisfaction and qf international seeing reductions in volume as the seats on their planes will be more expensive. In other words - do you really want to fly qantas? Is it objectively worth the premium and positioning currently?

discuss.

It seems like you’re looking for a pile on. So, no.

If you’re think VA don’t have issues like QF at the moment, you’re sadly mistaken.

Yeah but Virgin charges less, doesn't claim to be a premium carrier while stripping service but charging the "premium" price, hasn't got a lock on the corproate market that means a lot of business flyers are stuck experiencing the current QF, isn't overtly blaming passengers for its woes, and though it's also having issues, less so than Qantas (cancellation rate of approx 5% vs 8%).

The ultimate question posed is a fair one - is Qantas worth the premium? And right now the answer for many is proving to be... no.

Agreed to all of the above. Of course Virgin (and Jetstar) are experiencing some challenges in the current circumstances, but the long and short of it is that they are both running a more reliable operation than Qantas. That’s about the number one thing that business travellers (and anyone really) cares about, getting where they want to go, when they want to get there. The death by a thousand cuts is just the icing on the cake and salt in the wounds.

VA aren’t perfect, but they’re definitely not as bad as QF. Customers are noticing and Qantas can’t keep taking them for granted for much longer.

Flypelican is exiting it's NTL-DBO route at the start of July. Saw a story on Prime7 news about it, but can't find any other reporting of it. Report stated passengers not surprised as the schedule was down to two flights a week.
Presume that will also include BNK-DBO as the report said the airline was exiting from Dubbo completely.
Pelican would be better looking at Grafton now that REX are leaving that route.

Qf648 wrote:

Don’t doubt virgin is having issues but in 12 months I think we could see them tearing chunks out of qf’s market share.

And that’s bad for Qf as domestic is the cash cow

Once international students and backpackers start flowing in Q4/Q1 for uni, and summer breaks I think we’ll start to see the labour crisis ease a - won’t vanish as many students won’t return.

Not apologising for it - but QF go through these phases every few years - 767s were unreliable, grounding the fleet due strikes, poor legacy service in the late 90s, strikes here and there - they’ll do a corporate cleanse, bring in some improved/enhancements and the public will forget and be dutifully wed to their QF-points again. Not far off any long term relationship - they’ll be fine.

I’m more interested in if we’ll see any more 787s (9 or 10?) or of the current Boeing debacle has pushed any more top up orders to the 359 now QF have 350s on the way? Or yes JQ 788?

I can't see why Bain wouldn't have a crack at long haul sooner rather than later
The post Covid long haul environment is way different than pre Covid as many are looking for non-stop options, plus they have the backing to build it up quickly to profitable
Pre Covid VA made money trans Pacific and given the prices on new more efficient widebodies, that would continue to be the case
With QF dropping the ball of late and the limited Chinese / Hong Kong presence in OZ along with SAA and MAS issues and ME3 can be overflown, there is a abundance of routes to support a fleet of 789s
US. South Africa and especially India and Europe could all be viable
The trick is to get in quick before the demand returns.....

smi0006 wrote:

Qf648 wrote:

Don’t doubt virgin is having issues but in 12 months I think we could see them tearing chunks out of qf’s market share.

And that’s bad for Qf as domestic is the cash cow

Once international students and backpackers start flowing in Q4/Q1 for uni, and summer breaks I think we’ll start to see the labour crisis ease a - won’t vanish as many students won’t return.

Not apologising for it - but QF go through these phases every few years - 767s were unreliable, grounding the fleet due strikes, poor legacy service in the late 90s, strikes here and there - they’ll do a corporate cleanse, bring in some improved/enhancements and the public will forget and be dutifully wed to their QF-points again. Not far off any long term relationship - they’ll be fine.

I’m more interested in if we’ll see any more 787s (9 or 10?) or of the current Boeing debacle has pushed any more top up orders to the 359 now QF have 350s on the way? Or yes JQ 788?

I think the core question has to be how much longer for Joyce? What is it about this guy that warrants the senior talent churn QF has gone through, the latest being Evans. I'm assuming it's because Joyce knows where all the bodies are buried or has some ego driven lust for being around for Sunrise commencement. Or is he just that good?

On Virgin internationally, never underestimate the appeal of simplicity and cash cows with domestic/737 only ops (by and large). International is an order of magnitude more complex and risky, and most prone to future global event disruption. Also with Bain ownership, they'll be looking to exit soon enough and the prospect of international long haul for a future buyer is probably all the value they need from that segment.

Short to medium haul international on 737s is slowly growing, though they probably need another 8 or 10 to re-engage on NZ flights, which they don't appear too keen on.

Deano969 wrote:

I can't see why Bain wouldn't have a crack at long haul sooner rather than later
The post Covid long haul environment is way different than pre Covid as many are looking for non-stop options, plus they have the backing to build it up quickly to profitable
Pre Covid VA made money trans Pacific and given the prices on new more efficient widebodies, that would continue to be the case
With QF dropping the ball of late and the limited Chinese / Hong Kong presence in OZ along with SAA and MAS issues and ME3 can be overflown, there is a abundance of routes to support a fleet of 789s
US. South Africa and especially India and Europe could all be viable
The trick is to get in quick before the demand returns.....

Definitely agree. The 789 would be a perfect frame for them, giving access to a lot of 10+ hour markets with an efficient plane. I wouldn't be surprised if Boeing has been knocking on the door already and talking about an offer.

Deano969 wrote:

I can't see why Bain wouldn't have a crack at long haul sooner rather than later
The post Covid long haul environment is way different than pre Covid as many are looking for non-stop options, plus they have the backing to build it up quickly to profitable
Pre Covid VA made money trans Pacific and given the prices on new more efficient widebodies, that would continue to be the case
With QF dropping the ball of late and the limited Chinese / Hong Kong presence in OZ along with SAA and MAS issues and ME3 can be overflown, there is a abundance of routes to support a fleet of 789s
US. South Africa and especially India and Europe could all be viable
The trick is to get in quick before the demand returns.....

There is heaps of money to be made with a successful Australian predominantly domestic franchise in a stable duopoly. Bain is very disciplined with a model more Southwest than anything else. They know they can make millions from their investment in the next couple of years. Adding a long-haul international network is very expensive with a low rate of return. I doubt they will bother doing it themselves and instead continue to develop a network of partners such as SQ, UA and QR

tullamarine wrote:

Deano969 wrote:

I can't see why Bain wouldn't have a crack at long haul sooner rather than later
The post Covid long haul environment is way different than pre Covid as many are looking for non-stop options, plus they have the backing to build it up quickly to profitable
Pre Covid VA made money trans Pacific and given the prices on new more efficient widebodies, that would continue to be the case
With QF dropping the ball of late and the limited Chinese / Hong Kong presence in OZ along with SAA and MAS issues and ME3 can be overflown, there is a abundance of routes to support a fleet of 789s
US. South Africa and especially India and Europe could all be viable
The trick is to get in quick before the demand returns.....

There is heaps of money to be made with a successful Australian predominantly domestic franchise in a stable duopoly. Bain is very disciplined with a model more Southwest than anything else. They know they can make millions from their investment in the next couple of years. Adding a long-haul international network is very expensive with a low rate of return. I doubt they will bother doing it themselves and instead continue to develop a network of partners such as SQ, UA and QR

Yep and yep. Bain want to flog this off as a profitable entity. There is nothing wrong with a virtual international network. There is that little difference between airlines nowadays that it really doesn't matter.

I’d have to agree with the comment above regarding business travel times. I would have to say the last two months doing PER-ADL and return for work has been quite painful. Nothing has left on time, on the per -adl return there’s been continual delays of an hour or more.

The latter irks me quite a bit because QF isn’t running and early morning service so I’m losing a full day of my RNR because of it. So when I get back you kinda wonder if it’s worth it especially if you get back into Adelaide 2 hours late.


On Joyce you’d have to say he has been successful in leading QF. Certainly made hard decisions in the best interests of the company, but some of those made more recently probably deserve more scrutiny in the context of setting up QF for the future.

I would say that VA is now a real threat to take big chunks of market share as long as they are focussed and don’t lose sight of thier operating model ( a la borghetti)

Business travellers aren’t really JQ’s business model, but VA can be both - and I think that’s a real threat.

aerokiwi wrote:

I think the core question has to be how much longer for Joyce? What is it about this guy that warrants the senior talent churn QF has gone through, the latest being Evans. I'm assuming it's because Joyce knows where all the bodies are buried or has some ego driven lust for being around for Sunrise commencement. Or is he just that good?

I think he's just that good. Pre-pandemic Qantas was printing money and will do again. His strategy has really worked very well when looked at from an overall perspective, with Qantas being one of the few investment grade airlines in the world. If I was betting on him leaving, it would be sometime after Sunrise starts flying and not a second before. That being said, he could do a Michael O'Leary and just stay with Qantas in the role until he retires. As long as he continues to successfully lead the airline and enjoys it, there's no reason for him to go anywhere.

ClassicLover wrote:

aerokiwi wrote:

I think the core question has to be how much longer for Joyce? What is it about this guy that warrants the senior talent churn QF has gone through, the latest being Evans. I'm assuming it's because Joyce knows where all the bodies are buried or has some ego driven lust for being around for Sunrise commencement. Or is he just that good?

I think he's just that good. Pre-pandemic Qantas was printing money and will do again. His strategy has really worked very well when looked at from an overall perspective, with Qantas being one of the few investment grade airlines in the world. If I was betting on him leaving, it would be sometime after Sunrise starts flying and not a second before. That being said, he could do a Michael O'Leary and just stay with Qantas in the role until he retires. As long as he continues to successfully lead the airline and enjoys it, there's no reason for him to go anywhere.

The question to me would be what is next for him? Could he do an Eddington and head to other airlines? Would a BA/IAG CEO role be on his horizon? He is Irish but has he abandoned his attachment to Ireland and become fully Australian so is that relevant? I doubt he'd go to a US carrier and there are few Asian carriers I can see him wanting to or being able to take on. The UAE might be an option however would his sexuality be problematic in that part of the world? I doubt he'd go elsewhere for non-Airline CEO roles (though we could be surprised). In Australia there are few comparable CEO roles, with the others being either industrial or financial and different to an airline (im thinking BHP, the banks here), so id say they wouldn't be on the cards. So yeah, he might be leading for a long time. Though who knows he might be off in a year (i would have said next week but the fact that Evans is/has left tells me he isnt in any short term period).

The capabilities of the A332’s in the QF continue to astonish me, whether it be flying transcontinentals, domestic shuttles on the East Coast and now long hauls to LAX/DEL and soon JNB, surely the most underrated and flexible aircraft in the QF fleet.

qf2220 wrote:

The question to me would be what is next for him? Could he do an Eddington and head to other airlines? Would a BA/IAG CEO role be on his horizon? He is Irish but has he abandoned his attachment to Ireland and become fully Australian so is that relevant? I doubt he'd go to a US carrier and there are few Asian carriers I can see him wanting to or being able to take on. The UAE might be an option however would his sexuality be problematic in that part of the world? I doubt he'd go elsewhere for non-Airline CEO roles (though we could be surprised). In Australia there are few comparable CEO roles, with the others being either industrial or financial and different to an airline (im thinking BHP, the banks here), so id say they wouldn't be on the cards. So yeah, he might be leading for a long time. Though who knows he might be off in a year (i would have said next week but the fact that Evans is/has left tells me he isnt in any short term period).

I would be shocked if he left aviation, as it's all he's ever done. He started at Aer Lingus at age 22 straight out of University, then moved to Ansett when he was 30, then Qantas at 34, Jetstar at 37, then Qantas CEO at 42. He's now 55, so I guess he could do anything he wants to, but I'd say it would be in aviation. I daresay a lot of airlines would probably offer him quite a lucrative contract to work for them, but since he's been in Australia so long, why would he leave? It would have to be something really interesting to him you'd think, to make him uproot his life and go.

I doubt his sexuality would be an issue for employment in the Middle East, I know a few gay people working for airlines like Qatar Airways in Doha and they get along just fine (both at work and in their personal lives), so I wouldn't see any issue for someone at his level. That being said, why would he go there? Those airlines seem to be doing just fine, so what would he bring to the table that isn't already being done there?

I'll be curious to see what happens, but I would still be surprised if he didn't stay around for the Project Sunrise flights.

Deano969 wrote:

I can't see why Bain wouldn't have a crack at long haul sooner rather than later
The post Covid long haul environment is way different than pre Covid as many are looking for non-stop options, plus they have the backing to build it up quickly to profitable
Pre Covid VA made money trans Pacific and given the prices on new more efficient widebodies, that would continue to be the case
With QF dropping the ball of late and the limited Chinese / Hong Kong presence in OZ along with SAA and MAS issues and ME3 can be overflown, there is a abundance of routes to support a fleet of 789s
US. South Africa and especially India and Europe could all be viable
The trick is to get in quick before the demand returns.....

No chance BAIN will allow VA to go long haul before they IPO. Too much risk and not enough upside.

With QF’s new commitment to PER, and their order books chock-a-block with new aircraft, I don’t know whether this is just pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking on my (west aussie) part, but I see QF possibly launching a number of new mid/long haul routes ex. PER (e.g. A223 to KUL, 787 to NRT, flights to FRA and CDG, and possibly even the cliche LAX route), and a permanent base here for 787s, and possibly A350s. Wondering what other a.netters think.

anstar wrote:

Deano969 wrote:

I can't see why Bain wouldn't have a crack at long haul sooner rather than later
The post Covid long haul environment is way different than pre Covid as many are looking for non-stop options, plus they have the backing to build it up quickly to profitable
Pre Covid VA made money trans Pacific and given the prices on new more efficient widebodies, that would continue to be the case
With QF dropping the ball of late and the limited Chinese / Hong Kong presence in OZ along with SAA and MAS issues and ME3 can be overflown, there is a abundance of routes to support a fleet of 789s
US. South Africa and especially India and Europe could all be viable
The trick is to get in quick before the demand returns.....

No chance BAIN will allow VA to go long haul before they IPO. Too much risk and not enough upside.

VA hasn’t event tired to get on the Tasman yet, they are a while off long-haul if they can’t even give getting back on the Tasman ago.

NZ/QF are loving the Tasman to them shelf at the moment, they able to get people to pay up to $1000 Oneway for travel within the next month.

AdvancedBikkie wrote:

With QF’s new commitment to PER, and their order books chock-a-block with new aircraft, I don’t know whether this is just pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking on my (west aussie) part, but I see QF possibly launching a number of new mid/long haul routes ex. PER (e.g. A223 to KUL, 787 to NRT, flights to FRA and CDG, and possibly even the cliche LAX route), and a permanent base here for 787s, and possibly A350s. Wondering what other a.netters think.

Not sure about NRT since NH is already on the route but I’d love to see PER grow as a hub, CDG/FRA/AMS maybe routes to India to better connect the eastern hubs. They’re gonna need a bigger terminal to do this though.

AdvancedBikkie wrote:

With QF’s new commitment to PER, and their order books chock-a-block with new aircraft, I don’t know whether this is just pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking on my (west aussie) part, but I see QF possibly launching a number of new mid/long haul routes ex. PER (e.g. A223 to KUL, 787 to NRT, flights to FRA and CDG, and possibly even the cliche LAX route), and a permanent base here for 787s, and possibly A350s. Wondering what other a.netters think.

Probably getting ahead of myself a little given it was only announced last week, but if PER-CGK at a few days a week is successful on a 737, I’d imagine a more business friendly daily schedule on an A220 would be an option.

qf2220 wrote:

ClassicLover wrote:

aerokiwi wrote:

I think the core question has to be how much longer for Joyce? What is it about this guy that warrants the senior talent churn QF has gone through, the latest being Evans. I'm assuming it's because Joyce knows where all the bodies are buried or has some ego driven lust for being around for Sunrise commencement. Or is he just that good?

I think he's just that good. Pre-pandemic Qantas was printing money and will do again. His strategy has really worked very well when looked at from an overall perspective, with Qantas being one of the few investment grade airlines in the world. If I was betting on him leaving, it would be sometime after Sunrise starts flying and not a second before. That being said, he could do a Michael O'Leary and just stay with Qantas in the role until he retires. As long as he continues to successfully lead the airline and enjoys it, there's no reason for him to go anywhere.

The question to me would be what is next for him? Could he do an Eddington and head to other airlines? Would a BA/IAG CEO role be on his horizon? He is Irish but has he abandoned his attachment to Ireland and become fully Australian so is that relevant? I doubt he'd go to a US carrier and there are few Asian carriers I can see him wanting to or being able to take on. The UAE might be an option however would his sexuality be problematic in that part of the world? I doubt he'd go elsewhere for non-Airline CEO roles (though we could be surprised). In Australia there are few comparable CEO roles, with the others being either industrial or financial and different to an airline (im thinking BHP, the banks here), so id say they wouldn't be on the cards. So yeah, he might be leading for a long time. Though who knows he might be off in a year (i would have said next week but the fact that Evans is/has left tells me he isnt in any short term period).

I’d love to see him at somewhere like BHP so much fat in that organisation

grjplanes wrote:

Will SYD-JNB stay on 4 weekly, or will it still increase now that PER-JNB is starting?

It's going daily. Net capacity of daily SYD-JNB plus 3x weekly PER-JNB on B789 and A332, respectively, is still less than daily SYD-JNB on B744 though.

Qf648 wrote:

I'd be as certain to say yes on fuel surcharge. QF and VA won't miss the chance of another cash cow opportunity.

I'd argue that seeing the fuel surcharge as a cash cow shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how legacy/network carriers price fares in GDS systems. The airlines like the fuel surcharge since it allows a component of the final ticket price to correlate more with the actual fuel costs, and to do so in a more dynamic and automatic manner. The cost and time taken to change the large number of fair combinations in GDS systems in a huge burden and wouldn't allow the airline to respond to fuel price volatility efficiently. Furthermore to this, it allows the airlines to have greater cost-revenue segmentation by linking part of the ticket to more traditional and well understood revenue management, while keeping a fixed revenue component linked to some of the fuel cost. In the end, it's just a more efficient mechanism of adjusting prices quickly and frequently in a volatile input cost environment. If anything, it's a critique of the industry wide IT infrastructure and architecture.

Furthermore, it removes the upside and downside of this volatility that may be directly linked to commissions paid, whether to travel agents or to codeshare partners. Furthermore, it also may directly affect revenue sharing arrangements in joint ventures and allow greater segmentation of cost differences between more/less fuel efficient aircraft in such arrangements.

Qf648 wrote:

I’d love to see him at somewhere like BHP so much fat in that organisation

Are you sure? It's net margin in 2021 was 19%. It's EBIDTA margin was 59%. Even in 2018, a relatively poor year the same margins were 9% and 51%. With that sort of performance they're probably allowed to be fat!

Obzerva wrote:

AdvancedBikkie wrote:

With QF’s new commitment to PER, and their order books chock-a-block with new aircraft, I don’t know whether this is just pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking on my (west aussie) part, but I see QF possibly launching a number of new mid/long haul routes ex. PER (e.g. A223 to KUL, 787 to NRT, flights to FRA and CDG, and possibly even the cliche LAX route), and a permanent base here for 787s, and possibly A350s. Wondering what other a.netters think.

Probably getting ahead of myself a little given it was only announced last week, but if PER-CGK at a few days a week is successful on a 737, I’d imagine a more business friendly daily schedule on an A220 would be an option.

PER-CGK is 3 weekly & eventually 5 weekly once QF secure the slots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Booked on a JQ CNS-NRT flight in late July. I know JQ has been pushing recommencement dates back a bit, but what's the likelihood that my flight will be cancelled due to this?

EK413 wrote:

Obzerva wrote:

AdvancedBikkie wrote:

With QF’s new commitment to PER, and their order books chock-a-block with new aircraft, I don’t know whether this is just pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking on my (west aussie) part, but I see QF possibly launching a number of new mid/long haul routes ex. PER (e.g. A223 to KUL, 787 to NRT, flights to FRA and CDG, and possibly even the cliche LAX route), and a permanent base here for 787s, and possibly A350s. Wondering what other a.netters think.

Probably getting ahead of myself a little given it was only announced last week, but if PER-CGK at a few days a week is successful on a 737, I’d imagine a more business friendly daily schedule on an A220 would be an option.

PER-CGK is 3 weekly & eventually 5 weekly once QF secure the slots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

PER-CGK surviving is probably dependent on loads considering it's under WA Government/Perth Airport subsidised funding (Reconnect WA) package - The WA equivalent to the East Coast States' Aviation Funding Packages between their state governments and their respective capital city airports.

FromCDGtoSYD wrote:

AdvancedBikkie wrote:

With QF’s new commitment to PER, and their order books chock-a-block with new aircraft, I don’t know whether this is just pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking on my (west aussie) part, but I see QF possibly launching a number of new mid/long haul routes ex. PER (e.g. A223 to KUL, 787 to NRT, flights to FRA and CDG, and possibly even the cliche LAX route), and a permanent base here for 787s, and possibly A350s. Wondering what other a.netters think.

Not sure about NRT since NH is already on the route but I’d love to see PER grow as a hub, CDG/FRA/AMS maybe routes to India to better connect the eastern hubs. They’re gonna need a bigger terminal to do this though.

Agree with most except LAX, just can’t see it working. I’d be curious of the breakdown of pax with final destination LAX ex-PER and not rest of US. I’d rather connect via MEL/BNE/AKL, to ORD,IAH,SFO,DFW than dodge old LAX.

Not sure the amount of demand to AMS- maybe? Perhaps seasonal ATH first?

Still stunned FCO made the cut above CDG tbh! Surely next season? If FCO could work surely CDG, Sam amount of competition and yield?

QF's SFO I'd be tipping would likely be from SYD for the foreseeable future. MEL-SFO on QF a slim chance of resuming, and BNE-SFO on QF is less likely with the BAC/Qld co-subsidised UA service.

IIRC, DFW's Vice President and Global Strategist John Ackerman is calling for QF (or AA) to restart DFW-BNE. They are willing to work with the respective State Governments to restart the service (similar to the Vancouver Council / British Columbia / Queensland Government getting together to apply for Air Canada BNE-YVR service under the respective aviation funding packages e.g Qld AAIF, etc).

The Air Canada service is one of the few shining lights of the Qld Government/BAC's aviation funding packages when they work together with the respective overseas governments.

Source: https://www.pointhacks.com.au/news/dall ... rt-growth/

smi0006 wrote:

FromCDGtoSYD wrote:

AdvancedBikkie wrote:

With QF’s new commitment to PER, and their order books chock-a-block with new aircraft, I don’t know whether this is just pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking on my (west aussie) part, but I see QF possibly launching a number of new mid/long haul routes ex. PER (e.g. A223 to KUL, 787 to NRT, flights to FRA and CDG, and possibly even the cliche LAX route), and a permanent base here for 787s, and possibly A350s. Wondering what other a.netters think.

Not sure about NRT since NH is already on the route but I’d love to see PER grow as a hub, CDG/FRA/AMS maybe routes to India to better connect the eastern hubs. They’re gonna need a bigger terminal to do this though.

Agree with most except LAX, just can’t see it working. I’d be curious of the breakdown of pax with final destination LAX ex-PER and not rest of US. I’d rather connect via MEL/BNE/AKL, to ORD,IAH,SFO,DFW than dodge old LAX.

Not sure the amount of demand to AMS- maybe? Perhaps seasonal ATH first?

Still stunned FCO made the cut above CDG tbh! Surely next season? If FCO could work surely CDG, Sam amount of competition and yield?

Indeed FCO must have huge potential as it made the cut over FRA which used to be a daily 747 QF service and the last to survive in Europe outside London.

FCO also allows for better connections into Central Europe than CDG.

I wonder how long it will take for an airline to give PER-India a crack? Could be an opportunity for IndiGo with their 321LRs coming.