New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 160

American 767 · Wed Jun 10, 2015 8:44 pm

Please continue the discussion here.

New Zealand Aviation Thread Part 159 (by 777ER May 19 2015 in Civil Aviation)

Ben Soriano

PA515 · Wed Jun 10, 2015 9:08 pm

Looks like ZK-MVG had it's first flight on 09 June.

Photo at http://www.digitalairliners.com/TLSWatch/

PA515

ZKOJH · Thu Jun 11, 2015 2:22 am

"Threat of competition hits Air NZ stock"

Shares fall 5 per cent after American Airlines deal with Qantas but travel rep says move would boost overall market.

Air New Zealand shares fell by nearly 5 per cent after news that it could face competition on its lucrative direct routes to the United States from the world's biggest carrier, American Airlines.

One fund manager said although a lot of water was yet to go under the bridge, the news was not good for Air New Zealand, whose shares fell from $2.81 to $2.67 yesterday.

"We think it's one of the better routes that they have. It's not helpful to their profit to have someone else fly on it and I think the reaction in the share price is around this," said Salt Funds managing director Paul Harrison.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/air-new-ze...ticle.cfm?o_id=5&objectid=11463112

What could they do to protect this market? maybe start some sort of JV with UA?

wstakl · Thu Jun 11, 2015 2:38 am

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 2):

Careful now, some posters can't handle any threat or criticism of NZ! Great news anyway, lets hope some competition on the AKL-US routes force NZ to adjust their ridiculous fares.

LOL at gasmans last post in the previous thread....very true!

[Edited 2015-06-10 19:40:42]

mariner · Thu Jun 11, 2015 2:52 am

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 2):
One fund manager said although a lot of water was yet to go under the bridge, the news was not good for Air New Zealand, whose shares fell from $2.81 to $2.67 yesterday.

It might be a buying opportunity for a few shares.

mariner

Gasman · Thu Jun 11, 2015 4:06 am

Quoting wstakl (Reply 3):
LOL at gasmans last post in the previous thread....very true!

Cheers!

But apparently I have a vendetta against Air NZ, which I should take elsewhere.

Well, perhaps I do. Certainly for the first 4 decades of my life I was fanatical about Air NZ and loyal to it. The last ten years however have seen a myriad of profit driven moves combined with some imbecilic marketing which has certainly disappointed me, and caused them to lose my loyalty - if not my complete custom. It's true, I now take every opportunity to call them to account. But I also praise where praise is due.

ZKOJH · Thu Jun 11, 2015 4:36 am

"American Airlines plans Auckland-Los Angeles flights"

They are talking about a 2016 start - with possible use of 787 aircraft.

American Airlines could launch direct Auckland-Los Angeles flights in 2016, following the debut of its new daily Sydney-LAX service in December this year.

The Qantas partner and Oneworld member intends to lodge an application with NZ regulators for approval to operate trans-Pacific services in direct competition with Air New Zealand, reports The New Zealand Herald.

"It's certainly on our radar and we'll continue to explore the route to see when it makes sense financially," an American Airlines spokesman said.

http://www.ausbt.com.au/american-air...plans-auckland-los-angeles-flights

2015 has been impressive for AKL route wise , if this keeps going on into 2016 do they need to consider starting to build the second runway sooner? the international terminal is starting to get a wee bit full!

777ER · Thu Jun 11, 2015 4:50 am

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 2):

Excellent news! Really looking forward to some better fairness on the North American routes. Only times I'll fly NZ to LAX/SFO/YVR now is when I find a really good sale fare for the times I want to go/can book, but other wise I'm taking UA or maybe AC if the fare is right via MEL/SYD.

777ER · Thu Jun 11, 2015 5:04 am

An application by QF/AA for ATI on USA-Au/NZ American - Qantas File For ATI JV (by LAXintl Jun 10 2015 in Civil Aviation)

Gasman · Thu Jun 11, 2015 5:40 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 7):
Excellent news! Really looking forward to some better fairness on the North American routes.

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 6):
The Qantas partner and Oneworld member intends to lodge an application with NZ regulators for approval to operate trans-Pacific services in direct competition with Air New Zealand, reports The New Zealand Herald.

"It's certainly on our radar and we'll continue to explore the route to see when it makes sense financially," an American Airlines spokesman said.

It's certainly not bad news. The AKL-LAX-LHR route is largely what defines the long haul international product in my view. Price gouging here has had an effect on the entire network. Competition on this route would have positive spin-offs for every aspect of the international product. It's too late for me, at least in the medium term, but other NZ frequent fliers should only feel happy.

ZK-NBT · Thu Jun 11, 2015 5:57 am

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 6):
2015 has been impressive for AKL route wise , if this keeps going on into 2016 do they need to consider starting to build the second runway sooner? the international terminal is starting to get a wee bit full!

They don't need a second runway, maybe not even in 10 years IMO, however they do need more International gates, peak times can be pretty hectic. Even probably just another 2 A380 capable gates that can take 4 narrowbodies would be good for late night early morning peaks. I think they are due to expand again in 2016 on this front but it would be nice to see a 10 year plan rather than 3-4 and then a continuous building site.

Anyway great to see so many airlines routes coming to AKL, MU, CA, PR, AA, plus NZ expansion.

I wonder when we might see an NZ UA JV, which could make sense for UA to re enter aswell?

mariner · Thu Jun 11, 2015 5:57 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 5):
But apparently I have a vendetta against Air NZ, which I should take elsewhere.

Well, perhaps I do.

Express it whereever you want - here or elsewhere - but why a "vendetta"? What does it achieve? You don't like the product - fly someone else.

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 6):
"American Airlines plans Auckland-Los Angeles flights"

One good thing - assuming it happens - it should cut back on all the whinging about Air NZ's "monopoly routes."

mariner

Gasman · Thu Jun 11, 2015 6:07 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 11):
Express it whereever you want - here or elsewhere - but why a "vendetta"? What does it achieve? You don't like the product - fly someone else.

"Vendetta" was PA515's accusation, but I see the post has been deleted (not at my instigation). I guess I hope that my one small voice might have an effect somewhere, and the airline I was once *proud* to be loyal to might re-think the path it's on. Dreams are free.

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 6):
the international terminal is starting to get a wee bit full!

I've noticed a massive increase in terminal passenger traffic in the last 12 months. Sometimes it seems like standing room only in the main departures concourse.

mariner · Thu Jun 11, 2015 7:22 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 12):
I guess I hope that my one small voice might have an effect somewhere, and the airline I was once *proud* to be loyal to might re-think the path it's on. Dreams are free.

Good luck with that. I think you're pushing it uphill myself because part of what you want is for things to be like they were when you were young - or younger - and that's a dead end street.

There are things from the last that I miss - deeply - but they're not coming back, so I just move on.

mariner

Gasman · Thu Jun 11, 2015 8:06 am

Quoting mariner (Reply 13):
Good luck with that. I think you're pushing it uphill myself because part of what you want is for things to be like they were when you were young - or younger - and that's a dead end street.

There are things from the last that I miss - deeply - but they're not coming back, so I just move on.

I understand, and we've had this conversation before - but my actual bones of contention are:

- 10 abreast on the 777. Absolutely necessary? Really?
- Fares New Zealand - US
- Ricco. *Hilarious* safety videos.
- no consistent trans-Tasman product
- General standards (food, service, cleanliness, lounges) are slipping

........etc. etc. Sure I also miss the teal livery, heavily padded Y seats and loads of free trinkets; but that's not why most of my business now goes elsewhere.

777ER · Thu Jun 11, 2015 8:35 am

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 10):
I wonder when we might see an NZ UA JV, which could make sense for UA to re enter aswell?

Maybe UA could take over AKL-SFO.

At least with USA routes AKL also has HA which is enabling mainland competition but via HNL

ZK-NBT · Thu Jun 11, 2015 9:23 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 15):

Maybe UA could take over AKL-SFO.

I doubt NZ will drop SFO in favour of UA, I'd see UA operating a daily LAX or SFO service possibly the third LAX, weather NZ would reduce the second NZ5/6 in the off peak or not though, or maybe a daily SFO service complimenting NZ.

Zkpilot · Thu Jun 11, 2015 9:27 am

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 10):
I wonder when we might see an NZ UA JV, which could make sense for UA to re enter aswell?

They missed their chance with IAH. If/when AA join the market it is going to be very crowded and there literally isn't room for UA to join in. No way NZ would drop a flight to facilitate UA unless it was as part of some gentlemanly agreement to restart Oz-LAX for NZ. Only other potential destination would be DEN or ORD.

ZK-NBT · Thu Jun 11, 2015 9:37 am

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 17):

They missed their chance with IAH.

I think NZ are the better carrier to operate IAH, UA would be better from the west coast complimenting NZ where there is more O&D, I do think with a JV the market could probably support UA.

Zkpilot · Thu Jun 11, 2015 9:43 am

The other thing to consider is that the US$ is on an upwards path while the NZ$ is heading down. NZ is going to benefit from lower wage costs etc as a result. Latest prediction that came out today was US$0.60 to NZ$1 by end of this year.

DavidByrne · Thu Jun 11, 2015 11:11 am

Quoting 777ER (Reply 15):
Maybe UA could take over AKL-SFO.

Why would they?

aerorobnz · Thu Jun 11, 2015 11:58 am

Quoting DavidByrne (Reply 20):
Why would they?

Why would NZ give it up?? IAH was to protect NZ interests and delay competition from entering the NZ-US market. Giving one of your best route performers to another airline (alliance or not) is not going to help keep marketshare.

PA515 · Thu Jun 11, 2015 3:34 pm

Quoting wstakl (Reply 3):
Careful now, some posters can't handle any threat or criticism of NZ!

Not correct. But the same old crew complaining about Air NZ should be complaining about the absent competitors.

Quoting gasman (Reply 5):
But apparently I have a vendetta against Air NZ, which I should take elsewhere.

Well, perhaps I do.

It's been obvious for a while. Recently about half a thread of Air NZ bashing of which you contributed some.

Quoting gasman (Reply 12):
"Vendetta" was PA515's accusation, but I see the post has been deleted (not at my instigation).

Not at my instigation either. Should not have called you gasbag though.

Quoting gasman (Reply 14):
- 10 abreast on the 777. Absolutely necessary? Really?

Plenty of airlines think so, including AA.

Quoting gasman (Reply 14):
- Fares New Zealand - US

Air NZ are exploiting the lack of competition which has probably lasted longer than expected. The proceeds may be needed once the competition returns.

Quoting gasman (Reply 14):
- Ricco. *Hilarious* safety videos.

They seem to have learned from that embarrassment.

Quoting gasman (Reply 14):
- no consistent trans-Tasman product

Air NZ have indicated the A320/A321NEO's will have premium seating. Two years away, but VA have already made the change.

Quoting gasman (Reply 14):
- General standards (food, service, cleanliness, lounges) are slipping

I've seen some reports about cleanliness at Jetstar levels and that's disappointing. They need to fix that.

PA515

[Edited 2015-06-11 08:36:52]

Gasman · Thu Jun 11, 2015 6:02 pm

Quoting PA515 (Reply 22):
But the same old crew complaining about Air NZ should be complaining about the absent competitors.

We are, aren't we?

Quoting PA515 (Reply 22):
lack of competition which has probably lasted longer than expected.

Yes fair point.

Quoting PA515 (Reply 22):
They seem to have learned from that embarrassment.

But the point is, it happened - demonstrating a stratospheric lack of insight. This campaign was directly endorsed by the then CEO Rob Fyfe.

Quoting PA515 (Reply 22):
I've seen some reports about cleanliness at Jetstar levels and that's disappointing. They need to fix that.

It was pleasing to note when I flew on a 772 HKG-AKL last week in J, the cabin seemed scrupulously clean. So perhaps they're listening. My previous three experiences in J on NZ had revealed the cabin to be a toilet. Filthy seat partitions, evidence of spilled liquids not cleaned, dust and grime in all the alcoves and air vents......... yech. I'd got into the habit of using the pre-takeoff wet towel to give everything a good wipe.

mariner · Thu Jun 11, 2015 6:35 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 23):
But the point is, it happened - demonstrating a stratospheric lack of insight. This campaign was directly endorsed by the then CEO Rob Fyfe.

That's the point - under the last CEO.

Like any business, airlines - and their ad campaigns - change with different management. They are not immutable.

mariner

[Edited 2015-06-11 11:49:51]

Gasman · Thu Jun 11, 2015 8:13 pm

Quoting mariner (Reply 24):
Like any business, airlines - and their ad campaigns - change with different management. They are not immutable.

Airlines are not dictatorships. It would be trite to suggest that the last CEO alone was responsible for all the things that disappoint many of us here, and similarly that the company ethos will necessarily be much different now that he's moved on.

When I suggested to the airline at the time that they just might want to re-think the "Ricco" campaign, I got a response saying that appreciation of humour is a very personal thing, and my sense of same might not be sophisticated enough to get the *brilliant* double-entendres ("would you like to lick the crack", for example) contained within. Puh-leease.

Curiously, on the domestic side of NZ, I have few of the same beefs. Apart from the cringe-worthy safety videos, you could be forgiven for wondering if it's the same airline. The domestic lounge at AKL would be one of the best domestic lounges I've experienced anywhere. On-time performance is usually excellent. The hard product is appropriate for the task, especially with the space + seating at the front of the plane. Staff seem professional. I don't feel particularly financially fleeced. Unfortunately I only fly domestically a couple of times a year.

zkncj · Thu Jun 11, 2015 8:16 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 25):
Curiously, on the domestic side of NZ, I have few of the same beefs. Apart from the cringe-worthy safety videos, you could be forgiven for wondering if it's the same airline. The domestic lounge at AKL would be one of the best domestic lounges I've experienced anywhere. On-time performance is usually excellent. The hard product is appropriate for the task, especially with the space + seating at the front of the plane. Staff seem professional. I don't feel particularly financially fleeced. Unfortunately I only fly domestically a couple of times a year.

Haven't used the AKL Domestic lounge to much on an weekday morning?

Gasman · Thu Jun 11, 2015 8:20 pm

Quoting zkncj (Reply 26):
Haven't used the AKL Domestic lounge to much on an weekday morning?

No, now that you mention it. Usually midday onwards.

mariner · Thu Jun 11, 2015 8:34 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 25):
Airlines are not dictatorships.

Who claimed they are?

But a strong CEO is the admiral of the fleet, and it must be clear to you that the ad campaigns under Fyfe were more "edgy" (the bare crew) under Fyfe than they have been under Luxon, at least so far.

Rico may have been a mistake, but cripes, if you're still holding that against the airline then it starts to look like a grudge, and a fairly petty one at that.

mariner

PA515 · Thu Jun 11, 2015 8:48 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 25):
On-time performance is usually excellent.

And likely to get even better. Effective 07 September 2015 Air NZ will be increasing these A320 domestic sector times by 5 mins.

AKL-CHC to 1hr 25m, AKL-WLG to 1hr 05m, WLG-AKL to 1hr 05m and WLG-CHC to 50m.

PA515

zkncj · Thu Jun 11, 2015 8:51 pm

Quoting PA515 (Reply 29):
And likely to get even better. Effective 07 September 2015 Air NZ will be increasing these A320 domestic sector times by 5 mins.

AKL-CHC to 1hr 25m, AKL-WLG to 1hr 05m, WLG-AKL to 1hr 05m and WLG-CHC to 50m.

Sounds like an Jetstar trick

Gasman · Thu Jun 11, 2015 8:52 pm

Give me strength. Okay.

Quoting mariner (Reply 28):
Quoting gasman (Reply 25):
Airlines are not dictatorships.

Who claimed they are?

Yes Mariner, you never claimed that airlines are dictatorships. But in making this comment That's the point - under the last CEO. Like any business, airlines - and their ad campaigns - change with different management. They are not immutable. I felt you were placing an undue amount of relevance in the role of the CEO. But you did *not* use the word dictator. We should all be clear on that.

Quoting mariner (Reply 28):
Rico may have been a mistake, but cripes, if you're still holding that against the airline then it starts to look like a grudge, and a fairly petty one at that.

No, I am not holding a grudge. I am using it as an example of an inherent appalling lack of insight (that the CEO alone cannot take sole responsibility for.)

I feel disappointed - and, as a former very loyal FF, somewhat alienated - by what has happened to NZ over the last 10-15 years. I have moved on, but my only remaining argument is with those who would say the product decline is either all in my own head, or was necessary for commercial survival.

NZ107 · Thu Jun 11, 2015 9:08 pm

Quoting PA515 (Reply 22):
Air NZ have indicated the A320/A321NEO's will have premium seating.

They backtracked on that a few weeks ago and now won't guarantee the new 321s will have J.

Quoting PA515 (Reply 29):
AKL-CHC to 1hr 25m, AKL-WLG to 1hr 05m, WLG-AKL to 1hr 05m and WLG-CHC to 50m.

For all my life AKL-CHC has been 1:20 and AKL-WLG has been 1:00.. Sigh.

Mr AirNZ · Thu Jun 11, 2015 9:38 pm

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 32):
They backtracked on that a few weeks ago and now won't guarantee the new 321s will have J.

The aircraft aren't even fully specced yet and there have been no statements from the company regarding what the product offering onboard will be.

Posters here hypothesized what might be onboard but the company never said anything firm, only that some things might be possible.

So often on this forum I find ideas/suggestions from posters are turned into 'facts' overtime when Air New Zealand never said anything in the first place.

[Edited 2015-06-11 14:39:44]

[Edited 2015-06-11 15:31:48]

PA515 · Thu Jun 11, 2015 10:10 pm

Quoting Mr AirNZ (Reply 33):
So often on this forum I find ideas/suggestions from posters are turned into 'facts' overtime when Air New Zealand never said anything in the first place.

Not just a.net posters, but Australian Business Travel.

http://ausbt.com.au/air-new-zealand-...irbus-a321neo-trans-tasman-flights

PA515

kiwiandrew · Thu Jun 11, 2015 10:13 pm

Quoting PA515 (Reply 34):
Not just a.net posters, but Australian Business Travel.

http://ausbt.com.au/air-new-zealand-...irbus-a321neo-trans-tasman-flights

Yes, and you will notice the article says:

Air New Zealand is considering adding business class to its new Airbus A321neo flights between Auckland, Sydney and Melbourne in a move which would narrow the gap between it and Qantas.

There is a big difference between 'is considering' and what a lot of people have posted where it has been presented as 'Air New Zealand will be adding business class'.

keen2fly · Thu Jun 11, 2015 10:39 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 25):
Curiously, on the domestic side of NZ, I have few of the same beefs. Apart from the cringe-worthy safety videos, you could be forgiven for wondering if it's the same airline. The domestic lounge at AKL would be one of the best domestic lounges I've experienced anywhere. On-time performance is usually excellent. The hard product is appropriate for the task, especially with the space + seating at the front of the plane. Staff seem professional. I don't feel particularly financially fleeced. Unfortunately I only fly domestically a couple of times a year.

I totally agree with this statement. Fares (between main centres) are reasonable, competitive with JQ a lot of the time, and the service, from what I've experienced, is excellent. Flew domestically between AKL and WLG many times last year and NZ never missed a beat on about 10 flights. Started flying between AKL and PMR this year on Link services and they've been great as well; whenever I sit up the front I've had some great chats with cabin crew on take off and landing on the ATR-72. I put it down to competition, NZ is hyped up to be better than JQ, and if they don't live up to that, domestic flyers don't tend to have the same frequent flyer loyalty as there are not very many airpoints dollars/status points to be missed out on. So there's more at stake. Which is why I think AA would be very welcome in breaking the monopoly, because it would finally give NZ some motivation to be better on international services, hopefully the same motivation as I experience on domestic services.

ZKOJH · Fri Jun 12, 2015 4:13 am

Paris Airshow is around the corner (15-21 June) are we likely to expect some exciting news from anybody from down under? maybe NZ follow up on the 2 extra 77W's rumor that's be going around for a few months - or an A321 update? or the usual - order 2 more 787's

mariner · Fri Jun 12, 2015 5:36 am

Quoting gasman (Reply 31):
I feel disappointed - and, as a former very loyal FF, somewhat alienated - by what has happened to NZ over the last 10-15 years.

I think we've got that.

mariner

nascarnut · Fri Jun 12, 2015 5:55 am

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 37):
Paris Airshow is around the corner (15-21 June) are we likely to expect some exciting news from anybody from down under? maybe NZ follow up on the 2 extra 77W's rumor that's be going around for a few months - or an A321 update? or the usual - order 2 more 787's

Could NZ possibly look at an ATR72-600 top up to replace some of the older ATR72-500. Some of the earlier ATR's are older than the Beech's.
NZ also need to look at something between the ATR and the A320 for domestic travel. On some markets there is sufficient demand for a 90 seater to operate. Thoughts???

ZK-NBT · Fri Jun 12, 2015 6:33 am

Quoting nascarnut (Reply 39):
NZ also need to look at something between the ATR and the A320 for domestic travel. On some markets there is sufficient demand for a 90 seater to operate. Thoughts???

I wouldn't think so, sure there is a bigger gap now than the previous 136 seat 733s to 68 seat ATRs, and there are probably markets where the A320 is to big and the ATR to small but for a handful of routes is another type really worth it? I think not.

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 37):
Paris Airshow is around the corner (15-21 June) are we likely to expect some exciting news from anybody from down under

Do NZ ever order at Airshows? You never no, I probably wouldn't expect to much after the last few years orders but maybe this

Quoting nascarnut (Reply 39):
Could NZ possibly look at an ATR72-600 top up to replace some of the older ATR72-500. Some of the earlier ATR's are older than the Beech's.

Gasman · Fri Jun 12, 2015 6:38 am

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 40):
Do NZ ever order at Airshows?

Can't recall it ever happening. The last "high profile" order would've been as the launch customer for the 789, but that wasn't related to an airshow to my knowledge.

zkncj · Fri Jun 12, 2015 8:49 am

Quoting nascarnut (Reply 39):
Could NZ possibly look at an ATR72-600 top up to replace some of the older ATR72-500. Some of the earlier ATR's are older than the Beech's.

Makes sense, aren't some of the older 72-500s from 1998/1999? and maybe an order to replace the Q300s. Surely reducing the regional fleet down to one type, would have cost benefits to the airline, as well as providing greater flexibility.

Although that would be an massive order for ATR, replacing 11x 72-500 and 23x Q300s would 34 aircraft. 47 ATR 72-600s would be an pretty impressive fleet, would also explain the the heavy investment into ground support for the ATRs.

aotearoa · Fri Jun 12, 2015 11:07 am

Good on the airline for acknowledging the sector time increases. When you consider the 'block to block' time has to cover the ground and airborne time, it's damn important they reflect the reality of the average day out there.

With increasing traffic flows that inevitably drive flights to operate at speeds to meet the merge points as aircraft approach busy main airports, the flexibility of increased speed combined with ground congestion ultimately means the sector times will be driven higher.

Correct sector times also help to mitigate the previous flights delay impacting on the next sector/s.

I'm not sure how this can be considered 'Jetstar like', simply a realistic acknowledgment that the airline needs to deliver on the scheduled departure and arrival time. No story here folks - move along.

zkojq · Fri Jun 12, 2015 1:46 pm

What would be better; a 737 in a retro livery (but would only get to be in that livery for a few months) or a retro livery on an A320 that will be around for ~5 years?

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 2):
"We think it's one of the better routes that they have.

'One of the better routes'

Oh, you don't say. One would think that an analyst, whose job is to study the company closely, would have enough acumen to come up with a statement that better describes how well the carrier is exploiting their monopoly on that route.

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 6):
"American Airlines plans Auckland-Los Angeles flights"

They are talking about a 2016 start - with possible use of 787 aircraft.

American Airlines could launch direct Auckland-Los Angeles flights in 2016, following the debut of its new daily Sydney-LAX service in December this year.

Good on the face of it, because of more competition....but possibly bad overall IMO, since if AA starts flying LAX-AKL we can safely assume that Qantas doesn't intend to.

Quoting gasman (Reply 14):
I understand, and we've had this conversation before - but my actual bones of contention are:

- 10 abreast on the 777. Absolutely necessary? Really?
- Fares New Zealand - US
- Ricco. *Hilarious* safety videos.
- no consistent trans-Tasman product
- General standards (food, service, cleanliness, lounges) are slipping

For the most part, I agree with you, however you forgot to mention the silly new livery.

Quoting PA515 (Reply 22):
Plenty of airlines think so, including AA.

Just because AA does something, doesn't make it acceptable.

Quoting zkncj (Reply 30):

Sounds like an Jetstar trick

My thoughts entirely.

Quoting Mr AirNZ (Reply 33):
So often on this forum I find ideas/suggestions from posters are turned into 'facts' overtime when Air New Zealand never said anything in the first place.

If I keep going on and on about retro liveries here, will that make it the truth?

Quoting ZKOJH (Reply 37):
maybe NZ follow up on the 2 extra 77W's rumor that's be going around for a few months - or an A321 update? or the usual - order 2 more 787's

Maybe confirm that they are the launch customer for the A321neoLR for CHC-PER flights?

Quoting nascarnut (Reply 39):
NZ also need to look at something between the ATR and the A320 for domestic travel. On some markets there is sufficient demand for a 90 seater to operate. Thoughts???

The hypothetical ATR92 which ATR keeps talking about, but has never got around to launching?

Quoting ZK-NBT (Reply 40):
Do NZ ever order at Airshows? You never no, I probably wouldn't expect to much after the last few years orders but maybe this

They were the launch customer for Sharklets at the Dubai airshow in 2009.

Quote:
Airbus launched the Sharklet during the November 2009 Dubai air show, and Air New Zealand was the first to commit to the fuel saving devices.

http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/pr...ets-its-first-a320-with-sharklets/

Gasman · Fri Jun 12, 2015 7:53 pm

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 44):
If I keep going on and on about retro liveries here, will that make it the truth?

Hopefully. Although by "retro" you'll have to be clear that you don't mean the first iteration of the LOTR liveries.

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 44):
you forgot to mention the silly new livery.

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 44):
Good on the face of it, because of more competition....but possibly bad overall IMO, since if AA starts flying LAX-AKL we can safely assume that Qantas doesn't intend to.

I'd probably prefer QF also, but at the end of the day I'd take whoever will come onto the market with a good product and stick around for a few decades. UA I'd be wary of. Out of the three, they'd be the most likely to enter into a cosy duopoly setup with NZ, with fares remaining inflated.

On another topic..... anyone know how Sounds Air are doing?

PA515 · Fri Jun 12, 2015 9:19 pm

Quoting gasman (Reply 45):
On another topic..... anyone know how Sounds Air are doing?

Good source of Sounds Air info here http://3rdlevelnz.blogspot.co.nz

PA515

mariner · Fri Jun 12, 2015 9:22 pm

Quoting PA515 (Reply 46):
Good source of Sounds Air info here http://3rdlevelnz.blogspot.co.nz

Thanks for that, I didn't know the website.

The Sounds Air story is very interesting to me.

mariner

NZ107 · Sat Jun 13, 2015 12:36 am

Quoting ZKOJQ (Reply 44):
What would be better; a 737 in a retro livery (but would only get to be in that livery for a few months) or a retro livery on an A320 that will be around for ~5 years?

Neither. 77W.

Gasman · Sat Jun 13, 2015 5:31 am

IMHO, these are NZ's truly iconic aircraft/livery combinations:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 48):
Neither. 77W.

I would like to see a 77W (in fact all existing 777s) exiled to the planet Zorg. Failing that, one in the DC-8 Southern Cross livery I think would look pretty cool.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net