For me, instead of partnering with Emirates, I would partner with Cathay Pacific and put HKG as my secondary hub. With this, I wouldn't need to worry about competition on the HKG - Australia flights. And I would be able to codeshare on CX's European Routes, while CX could codeshare on my domestic/transtasman routes.
EK provides a much larger European network for QF to tap into. Furthermore QF already places significant importance on Hong Kong however it is being repositioned as a primary business destination as opposed to simply a stopover point to Europe. However there are 2 significant points that prevent a QF/CX tie up from happening. The first being the regulators would never approve such a monopoly, particularly now that VS have pulled out of the Australia - Hong Kong market.
NZ was smart enough to partner with SQ instead of CX (it makes more sense).
NZ actually partner both SQ and CX and I agree that it was a a very smart manoeuvre by Luxon and co.
Secondly, I will not use Jetstar as the "international subsidiary".
I'm not sure where the concept of JQ as an "international subsidiary" came from as QF still have albeit smaller but nonetheless a significant international network granted it is focused on the Eastern Seaboard.
Let's take SIN-PER as an example, Jetstar has been operating that route too successfully that its own parent company has to stop flying that route. I would actually ensure Jetstar has lesser frequency that my own airline, and more frequency on QF. I would price the flights at an attractive price, yet with great service and products onboard, increasing the amount of passengers. This may not kill SQ, but it will still make a better profit.
In my opinion, QF's withdrawal from the PER-SIN route is showing that Joyce's management team are recognising the changing nature of the PER-SIN market. Previously the double daily flights fed into a sizeable SIN hub with connections to Europe. However with that hub no relocated to DXB, SIN has like HKG become a primary business destination for QF focusing on O&D and thus the corresponding drop in passenger numbers and subsequently fewer flights. If anything, the Australia - South East Asian market is suffering from overcapacity by the low cost carriers. Whilst it would be nice for QF to reinstate PER-SIN (possible with a 738) and my personal wish for routes such as PER-HKG and PER-CGK we need to remember that the mining boom in WA is very much finished and that the Qantas Group as a whole must be a lean and efficient operation. We also need to remember that QF will inevitably have a higher cost base than its primary competitor on the route (which would be SQ) and so QF would have to heavily rely on contracts as well as its frequent flyer base in order to ensure profitable flights. Thus is I see it somewhat unlikely in the near future for QF to reinstate PER-SIN until the market picks up again and is no longer suffering from overcapacity.
Lastly, I would rather use the 787 to expand QF's network, than to give it to Jetstar.
Had the initial 14 788s been moved over to QF we would have seen an absolute mess of a fleet at QF. By moving all 788s over to JQ we have seen JQ return their A330s to QF in order to make for a more consistent product. This will also allow a much smoother transition for future 789s to be rolled out into the QF fleet as the Qantas Group by that time would be vastly experienced in 787 operations.
With QF tipped to return to profit this financial year, I can see ~12 789 options being firmed up with deliveries starting late 2016. Routes i'd personally like to see the 789s run on would be the Tokyo, Singapore and Hong Kong routes with potential for new services such as BNE-PVG, and the reinstatement of Asian services to PER. In the longer term, we should see potentially all the options firmed up for replacement of the A330s as well as further forays on the international scene. Routes I'd personally like to see would be BNE-DFW, SYD-YVR, SYD-SFO, PER-JNB, SYD-PEK, SYD-ICN and BNE-DXB-BER/FRA.
Sign In
Create Account
Back to top
In the 747?
