BITRE Airport Traffic Data for Jan 2018 has been released.https://bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/airport_traffic_data.aspx

There's plenty of good information in this publication, but from a TasFlyer perspective:

The combination of JQ's HBA-ADL and TT's HBA-OOL averaged an 84.4% load factor over January 2018 (9,118 pax, 10,800 seats).

That seems quite reasonable for new routes. Its a shame TT will not operate the HBA-OOL from the end of April. Hopefully it returns later in the year, and hopefully JQ's HBA-ADL is increased from three per week up to daily as well.

Any idea what happened with VH-EBD operating QF583?



EK413

Hong Kong airlines reducing CNS and OOL from 5 weekly to 3 weekly effective 1 July to 27 October

https://twitter.com/airlineroute/status ... 24128?s=21

EK413 wrote:

Any idea what happened with VH-EBD operating QF583?



EK413

Is this the same bird that had hydraulic issues earlier in the week ? also enroute Syd > Per

An767

An767 wrote:

EK413 wrote:

Any idea what happened with VH-EBD operating QF583?



EK413

Is this the same bird that had hydraulic issues earlier in the week ? also enroute Syd > Per

An767

I’m not sure if that was -EBD OR -EBM?

EK413

EK413 wrote:

An767 wrote:

EK413 wrote:

Any idea what happened with VH-EBD operating QF583?



EK413

Is this the same bird that had hydraulic issues earlier in the week ? also enroute Syd > Per

An767

I’m not sure if that was -EBD OR -EBM?

EK413

EBD returned to SYD due to a hydraulic issue

http://theqantassource.com/qantas-a330- ... al-return/

Qantas has fired back at Canberra Airport calling their cash incentive a stunt

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-new ... 0y9x1.html

qf789 wrote:

EK413 wrote:

An767 wrote:

Is this the same bird that had hydraulic issues earlier in the week ? also enroute Syd > Per

An767

I’m not sure if that was -EBD OR -EBM?

EK413

EBD returned to SYD due to a hydraulic issue

http://theqantassource.com/qantas-a330- ... al-return/

EBB ended up operating QF583 to PER departing SYD at 2349 last night

EK413 wrote:

Any idea what happened with VH-EBD operating QF583?



EK413

hydraulics.... see

http://avherald.com/h?article=4b6efd1c&opt=0

qf789 wrote:

Qantas has fired back at Canberra Airport calling their cash incentive a stunt

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-new ... 0y9x1.html

My favourite quote from that was - "As one of the most expensive airports in the nation, we're not surprised they've got the resources to be offering cash prizes."

CBR is sure doing a good job of burning relations with QF and VA by continuing to trash them in the media by offering these stunts.

Qantas16 wrote:

My favourite quote from that was - "As one of the most expensive airports in the nation, we're not surprised they've got the resources to be offering cash prizes."

If only they'd use that money to get NZ in, to AKL.

Cheers,

C.

qf789 wrote:

planemanofnz wrote:

Qantas16 wrote:

My favourite quote from that was - "As one of the most expensive airports in the nation, we're not surprised they've got the resources to be offering cash prizes."

If only they'd use that money to get NZ in, to AKL.

Cheers,

C.

If NZ wants to fly to CBR they should fly there on their own merits not rely on handouts

I agree, though NZ has been happy to take handouts in the past on routes like SYD - RAR, AKL - IUE, SYD - NLK, RAR - LAX and others. Plus, AFAIK, CBR has been happy to give out handouts in the past, to carriers like SQ. Therefore, one can't rule out the possibility of CBR and NZ doing a deal.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

Qantas16 wrote:

My favourite quote from that was - "As one of the most expensive airports in the nation, we're not surprised they've got the resources to be offering cash prizes."

If only they'd use that money to get NZ in, to AKL.

Cheers,

C.

If NZ wants to fly to CBR they should fly there on their own merits not rely on handouts

^^ It will likely take a mix of incentives and a solid business case.

Many routes commence off the back of incentives, which are especially beneficial on the start up phase. This is usually via marketing support or fee relief at an airport.

AKL-CBR would likely have a stronger chance than WLG-CBRthough based on the advantages of AKL being a larger city and the main NZ hub there.

Qantas16 wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Qantas has fired back at Canberra Airport calling their cash incentive a stunt

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-new ... 0y9x1.html

My favourite quote from that was - "As one of the most expensive airports in the nation, we're not surprised they've got the resources to be offering cash prizes."

CBR is sure doing a good job of burning relations with QF and VA by continuing to trash them in the media by offering these stunts.

It’s a lesson to airports that grand new terminals ultimately increase costs and these sort of comments can very easily be throw in their direction.

Build it and they will come hasn’t really transpired for that airport. It had a few years of quite sluggish pax performance, but at least has gained SQ and QR into the airport since.

The reality is that on a shuttle type operation that operates on SYD-CBR it shouldn’t be a shock that having more operational flexibility can lead to higher cancellation rates.

redroo wrote:

Things are starting to unravel for Virgin but there may be a bright side to this. It may force virgin to concentrate on its own business and not being a virtual network carrier (or whatever it was).

I do think they need to join an alliance - be that skyteam or star. They are always going to struggle against QF unless there is a consistent decent value proposition. Whilst I’d personally love them to join star, the logical thing to do would be to join skyteam with delta. Unfortunately JB is hampered somewhat by his crazy ownership structure.

SkyTeam is basically VA's 'only' alliance option (in conjunction with their long time buddies at DL) if JB is to move away from his "no alliance" policy.

Oneworld is definitely out, and any hopes from FF's of VA joining *A has basically disintegrated.

Any attempts by SQ (or any other *A carrier) to sponsor VA into *A will just be met with a veto each from NZ and UA for numerous reasons.
Only chance if Star Alliance (NZ and/or UA) gets involved with VA in the future is if things suddenly go south and there's a liquidation "fire sale" to pick up VA's slots and/or owned 737s/777s.

The ACT government is in talks with both CZ and HX on direct flights to Greater China.

See: https://www.smh.com.au/politics/act/and ... 4z7yq.html.

Who would be the stronger candidate? CZ is obviously in a superior financial position.

Cheers,

C.

sq256 wrote:

redroo wrote:

Things are starting to unravel for Virgin but there may be a bright side to this. It may force virgin to concentrate on its own business and not being a virtual network carrier (or whatever it was).

I do think they need to join an alliance - be that skyteam or star. They are always going to struggle against QF unless there is a consistent decent value proposition. Whilst I’d personally love them to join star, the logical thing to do would be to join skyteam with delta. Unfortunately JB is hampered somewhat by his crazy ownership structure.

SkyTeam is basically VA's 'only' alliance option (in conjunction with their long time buddies at DL) if JB is to move away from his "no alliance" policy.

Oneworld is definitely out, and any hopes from FF's of VA joining *A has basically disintegrated.

Any attempts by SQ (or any other *A carrier) to sponsor VA into *A will just be met with a veto each from NZ and UA for numerous reasons.
Only chance if Star Alliance (NZ and/or UA) gets involved with VA in the future is if things suddenly go south and there's a liquidation "fire sale" to pick up VA's slots and/or owned 737s/777s.

I'm still not convinced VA needs to join an alliance.

The only significant on carriage from a SkyTeam airline in AU from a market segment VA is actively chasing, they already get in DL.
KE, GA, VN, CI to my knowledge VA haven't even looked at, and I really can't see a close relationship with MU or CZ given HU, HX, GS, JD are all on the Velocity roster.

For my mind, given VA's partial withdrawal, and the TT disaster to DPS, and the fact it wouldn't overly impact their existing relationships, they could move a little bit closer to GA.

People seem to think that joining an alliance is free, there are massive costs for joining an alliance, and not a single airline has done that in the last 3 years. The move is towards more tailored relationships, hence my suggestion for striking a deal with GA. That would be two fold, it would give access to a large market close to Australia, and also head off any competition from Indonesian low cost carriers to Australia.

Most people seem to want an alliance because they're not sure which lounge they need to go, and is it confusing, ABSOLUTELY, but the cost of joining an alliance would be counter intuitive.

What VA needs to do is form a few more relationships, more interline agreements, their current arrangements are small compared to most.
They're working closer with VS for codeshares on their AU-HKG flights to connect to VS, they're missing one great big market there, the LH group - LH/LX/OS fares all use pretty much every airline between AU and Asia as a part of their fares connecting to Europe, QF, JQ, SQ, TG, JL, OZ, CX, CA, etc. to help get some more bums on seats on their AU-HKG flights, VA would be smart to try and get in on that action.

Obzerva wrote:

I'm still not convinced VA needs to join an alliance.

The only significant on carriage from a SkyTeam airline in AU from a market segment VA is actively chasing, they already get in DL.
KE, GA, VN, CI to my knowledge VA haven't even looked at, and I really can't see a close relationship with MU or CZ given HU, HX, GS, JD are all on the Velocity roster.

For my mind, given VA's partial withdrawal, and the TT disaster to DPS, and the fact it wouldn't overly impact their existing relationships, they could move a little bit closer to GA.

People seem to think that joining an alliance is free, there are massive costs for joining an alliance, and not a single airline has done that in the last 3 years. The move is towards more tailored relationships, hence my suggestion for striking a deal with GA. That would be two fold, it would give access to a large market close to Australia, and also head off any competition from Indonesian low cost carriers to Australia.

Most people seem to want an alliance because they're not sure which lounge they need to go, and is it confusing, ABSOLUTELY, but the cost of joining an alliance would be counter intuitive.

What VA needs to do is form a few more relationships, more interline agreements, their current arrangements are small compared to most.
They're working closer with VS for codeshares on their AU-HKG flights to connect to VS, they're missing one great big market there, the LH group - LH/LX/OS fares all use pretty much every airline between AU and Asia as a part of their fares connecting to Europe, QF, JQ, SQ, TG, JL, OZ, CX, CA, etc. to help get some more bums on seats on their AU-HKG flights, VA would be smart to try and get in on that action.

While I agree with you in relation to the cost of an alliance membership being not an option in VA's current financial position, the "tailored partnership" approach has clearly not worked for them over the past few years. The problem is each of those relationships has two parties who want something out of the deal, so not only VA but also EY, SQ, NZ, HX and so on. So while it looks great from a VA perspective of cherry-picking all the benefits, it also means that VA is being torn left, right and centre with all partners having different priorities, and if this does not work they will walk. Or VA is reduced to providing the bare minimum that is required to keep them all happy - domestic feed and a large FF base. (VA has the additional complexity of four different airlines in the boardroom, so this is another level on top of that.)

Your point about GA is a good example: it sure would make sense from a VA perspective and from a GA perspective also. But I am sure SQ won't support this at all. They have most to loose here given they would currently receive the lions share of the premium Velocity-affiliated customers. So it's not going to happen.

So I think there is no good solution for VA, only ones that are less bad than others.

VA would have had so much more success if it modelled itself on B6 or AS, stayed a 737 domestic operation and let every airline who wasn't affiliated with QF be a codeshare partner.

If virgin want to be on the global scene and capture any of the high yielding corporate traffic then it needs to be in one of the alliances IMHO. Aussies travel so much internationally and right now the virgin proposition is a mess.

On the other hand they could give up the global ambitions and just be an Australian airline.

But I’ve said this before. They can’t compete with qantas at the top end and they can’t compete with Jetstar at the bottom end. They’re stuck in the middle - which is not a good place to be.

Interesting article/thought leadership post about Delta and the B717 (I know not strictly related to Australian Aviation but given the bulk of non-Delta 717's are in service with QF I though some of you might find it interesting) : The Vision of the 717 - How Delta turned the jet nobody wanted into a strategic powerhouse
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/vision-7 ... gic-miller

Nice read.

Delta will ultimately replace them with CS100s that they are already receiving.
Volotea in Spain are swapping for 319s.

So might be a few more aircraft available for Hawaiian and Qantas if they wanted them.

Qantas has applied to IASC to codeshare with China Airlines to New Zealand from 1 June 18

https://blueswandaily.com/qantas-applie ... ew-zeland/

qf789 wrote:

Qantas has applied to IASC to codeshare with China Airlines to New Zealand from 1 June 18

https://blueswandaily.com/qantas-applie ... ew-zeland/

This is good to see, as it'll hopefully give a boost to CI's AKL presence, which is facing stiff competition from NZ's AKL - TPE launch.

We may also see an extension of CI's MEL - CHC season, if QF's code-sharing support can direct more traffic on this route CI's way.

Could there be a risk that IASC won't approve the application, for fear of giving QF too much dominance post the NZ-VA JV ending?

Cheers,

C.

Today's QF467 SYD-MEL returned to SYD due to hydraulic issues



https://twitter.com/Highflyermel/status ... 3287930885

Aircraft in question is A332 VH-EBD, same aircraft that returned to SYD a couple days ago with hydraulic issues

Obzerva wrote:

... they're missing one great big market there, the LH group - LH/LX/OS fares all use pretty much every airline between AU and Asia as a part of their fares connecting to Europe, QF, JQ, SQ, TG, JL, OZ, CX, CA, etc. to help get some more bums on seats on their AU-HKG flights, VA would be smart to try and get in on that action.

The problem is that the LH Group is getting into bed with the CX Group, so in terms of HKG - Australia, the LH Group will not code-share on VA.

What about deeper integration with the AF-KL Group - for example, KL making AMS - DPS non-stop, and feeding VA's DPS - Australia routes?

Some points on this:

- DPS can be reached with VA's 737's, while SIN and HKG can't
- VA has a lot more slack in the 737 fleet than the 332/77W ones
- DPS is closer, so getting away with the 737's product is easier
- 737's would allow small Australian ports to be served, like TSV
- VA could thus give AF-KL more Australia connections than MH

While SQ would be pissed off about this, it's only a minority shareholder, so it probably couldn't block it. Though, it could hurt VA in other ways.

GA might also try to stop this from happening, given its SkyTeam membership with AF-KL, and its current dominance at DPS relative to others.

Nevertheless, an interesting thought ...



Cheers,

C.

qf789 wrote:

Hong Kong airlines reducing CNS and OOL from 5 weekly to 3 weekly effective 1 July to 27 October

https://twitter.com/airlineroute/status ... 24128?s=21

This is disappointing, and in stark contrast to the likes of TR who are increasing OOL - SIN, and LJ who are launching OOL - ICN. I wonder what growth OOL will see from other carriers in the coming year? IMO, QR is a possibility, given its inability to serve BNE - though, given OOL's runway length, any service would have to be via Asia. A wide-body service to AKL on NZ is also a possibility. Meanwhile, HX is supposedly in talks with CBR, to launch a CBR - HKG service. Interesting times.

Cheers,

C.

Interline feed carried on tickets issued on another airlines ticket stocks offer negligible revenue, I realise that, and I understand it isn’t a large part of their business. Nonetheless it is both arrogant and stingy IMHO that VA will gladly take a *ticketing* interline with anyone but not a *baggage* interline.
Domestic connections with VA can be ticketed with a raft of international airlines. VN, GA, QR, UA are four that come to mind straight away. However VA will not interline baggage to airlines who are not their preferred partners, meaning that passengers have to collect their bags and change terminals with them. It’s like they are happy to take the money but not willing to provide the service. Thankfully those four airlines (and pretty much every other one that flies to Australia) also interline with QF, so I go out of my way to ensure my customers are on QF for the domestic tag as they actually treat their passengers properly.

Obzerva wrote:

What VA needs to do is form a few more relationships, more interline agreements, their current arrangements are small compared to most.
They're working closer with VS for codeshares on their AU-HKG flights to connect to VS, they're missing one great big market there, the LH group - LH/LX/OS fares all use pretty much every airline between AU and Asia as a part of their fares connecting to Europe, QF, JQ, SQ, TG, JL, OZ, CX, CA, etc. to help get some more bums on seats on their AU-HKG flights, VA would be smart to try and get in on that action.

No different that what NZ does to Europe - they will happily ticket you on an large array of airlines for the Asia to Europe sector, provide the customer with the best price and options that match them and not be locked into a small amount of codeshare flights.

For example Auckland to Paris booked via NZ they are giving me options on: AF,CA,CX,JL.

planemanofnz wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Hong Kong airlines reducing CNS and OOL from 5 weekly to 3 weekly effective 1 July to 27 October

https://twitter.com/airlineroute/status ... 24128?s=21

This is disappointing, and in stark contrast to the likes of TR who are increasing OOL - SIN, and LJ who are launching OOL - ICN. I wonder what growth OOL will see from other carriers in the coming year? IMO, QR is a possibility, given its inability to serve BNE - though, given OOL's runway length, any service would have to be via Asia. A wide-body service to AKL on NZ is also a possibility. Meanwhile, HX is supposedly in talks with CBR, to launch a CBR - HKG service. Interesting times.

Cheers,

C.

I don't think QR will launch OOL at all because they are intent at launching BNE. As well as, there are no premium lounges or areas at OOL that Qatar would deem appropriate. The runway might also not be long enough for a fully-laden 77W. BTW, OOL-AKL have a wide-body link. Air Asia X operate an A333 on a daily flight that routes KUL-OOL-AKL-OOL-KUL.

oskarclare wrote:

planemanofnz wrote:

qf789 wrote:

Hong Kong airlines reducing CNS and OOL from 5 weekly to 3 weekly effective 1 July to 27 October

https://twitter.com/airlineroute/status ... 24128?s=21

This is disappointing, and in stark contrast to the likes of TR who are increasing OOL - SIN, and LJ who are launching OOL - ICN. I wonder what growth OOL will see from other carriers in the coming year? IMO, QR is a possibility, given its inability to serve BNE - though, given OOL's runway length, any service would have to be via Asia. A wide-body service to AKL on NZ is also a possibility. Meanwhile, HX is supposedly in talks with CBR, to launch a CBR - HKG service. Interesting times.

Cheers,

C.

I don't think QR will launch OOL at all because they are intent at launching BNE. As well as, there are no premium lounges or areas at OOL that Qatar would deem appropriate. The runway might also not be long enough for a fully-laden 77W. BTW, OOL-AKL have a wide-body link. Air Asia X operate an A333 on a daily flight that routes KUL-OOL-AKL-OOL-KUL.

I went to OOL for the first time yesterday. What an absolute hole! It’s nothing more than a farm shed with shops in it. Come to thing of it, that’s rude to farm sheds.

oskarclare wrote:

BTW, OOL-AKL have a wide-body link. Air Asia X operate an A333 on a daily flight that routes KUL-OOL-AKL-OOL-KUL.

Think its now likely to see NZ add an daily 789/77E service on AKL-OOL-AKL by the end of this year, due to the break up with VA.

Something like this? Allowing seamless connections to YVR,SFO,LAX,IAH,ORD,EZE
AKL-OOL 0900-1045
OOL-AKL 1145-1700

J would probably be an hard full with OOL, although PE should be able to appeal to the middle class traffic to the gold coast.

Article is behind a paywall, but Toowoomba-Wellcamp is apparently in talks with AirAsia X to be it's first international carrier.

https://myaccount.news.com.au/sites/couriermail/subscribe.html?sourceCode=CMWEB_WRE170_a_GGL&mode=premium&dest=http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/lowcost-airline-air-asia-starts-talks-with-wellcamp-airport/news-story/8b7ca417e3a85aac8ecccc1166619030?memtype=anonymous

Crackshot wrote:

Article is behind a paywall, but Toowoomba-Wellcamp is apparently in talks with AirAsia X to be it's first international carrier.

https://myaccount.news.com.au/sites/couriermail/subscribe.html?sourceCode=CMWEB_WRE170_a_GGL&mode=premium&dest=http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/lowcost-airline-air-asia-starts-talks-with-wellcamp-airport/news-story/8b7ca417e3a85aac8ecccc1166619030?memtype=anonymous

Fernandes has told The Australian that they look to go from operating 9 daily flights to Australia to 20 daily flights which IMO seems over ambitious considering they have recently cut flights to SYD, PER & OOL. Both ADL and Wellcamp have been named as possibilities

In an interview with The Australian, Mr Fernandes said Air­Asia’s aim was to expand its flights to Australia from about nine a day to 20 a day.
Asia’s largest low-cost carrier, which has been flying into Australia for the past 11 years, is looking at expanding into airports such as Toowoomba and Adelaide as it seeks to capitalise on the growing demand for low-cost travel in Asia.
“We are really excited by Australia,” Mr Fernandes said.
“We want to create more opportunities for Australians to fly into Southeast Asia and for people from the ASEAN countries to fly here.”

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/busine ... 50a5538958

AirAsia X wants to get into more secondary airports to reduce costs.

AirAsia X airfares between Australian capital cities and its Kuala Lumpur hub could drop by 20 per cent if the company can strike more regional airport deals here, where airports of interest include Toowoomba in Queensland and Newcastle, north of Sydney, the company's founder and Group CEO, Tony Fernandes, told AFR Weekend in an interview on the sidelines of the ASEAN-Australia summit in Sydney on Friday.
"We're looking at Toowoomba as an alternative to Brisbane and we're also very interested in Newcastle," Mr Fernandes said, adding, "we'd also love to go back into Adelaide – and Cairns is of huge interest as is Tasmania."

http://www.afr.com/lifestyle/travel/wor ... 316-h0xkqn

qf789 wrote:

Crackshot wrote:

Article is behind a paywall, but Toowoomba-Wellcamp is apparently in talks with AirAsia X to be it's first international carrier.

https://myaccount.news.com.au/sites/couriermail/subscribe.html?sourceCode=CMWEB_WRE170_a_GGL&mode=premium&dest=http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/lowcost-airline-air-asia-starts-talks-with-wellcamp-airport/news-story/8b7ca417e3a85aac8ecccc1166619030?memtype=anonymous

Fernandes has told The Australian that they look to go from operating 9 daily flights to Australia to 20 daily flights which IMO seems over ambitious considering they have recently cut flights to SYD, PER & OOL. Both ADL and Wellcamp have been named as possibilities

In an interview with The Australian, Mr Fernandes said Air­Asia’s aim was to expand its flights to Australia from about nine a day to 20 a day.
Asia’s largest low-cost carrier, which has been flying into Australia for the past 11 years, is looking at expanding into airports such as Toowoomba and Adelaide as it seeks to capitalise on the growing demand for low-cost travel in Asia.
“We are really excited by Australia,” Mr Fernandes said.
“We want to create more opportunities for Australians to fly into Southeast Asia and for people from the ASEAN countries to fly here.”

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/busine ... 50a5538958

AirAsia X wants to get into more secondary airports to reduce costs.

AirAsia X airfares between Australian capital cities and its Kuala Lumpur hub could drop by 20 per cent if the company can strike more regional airport deals here, where airports of interest include Toowoomba in Queensland and Newcastle, north of Sydney, the company's founder and Group CEO, Tony Fernandes, told AFR Weekend in an interview on the sidelines of the ASEAN-Australia summit in Sydney on Friday.
"We're looking at Toowoomba as an alternative to Brisbane and we're also very interested in Newcastle," Mr Fernandes said, adding, "we'd also love to go back into Adelaide – and Cairns is of huge interest as is Tasmania."

http://www.afr.com/lifestyle/travel/wor ... 316-h0xkqn

Thanks for the link - and yes, I don't see them into BNE anytime soon if at all. I think maybe MCY when the new runway is operational - although that's still a good while to go.

It’s likely best they review the performance of Avalon before thinking of making any significant moves into other secondary airports.

Newcastle and Toowoomba are riskier propositions as they are further away from Sydney and Brisbane respectively. Brisbane in particular is also a smaller market to Malaysia as it is, which compares to a situation where Avalon is relatively close to Australia’s largest O&D market to Malaysia (Melbourne).

At the end of the day, Air Asia X is far too hard to read, as they change strategy far too quickly to read much into anything they say. They need to build a solid foundation and then look at how to sustain growth, which they appear to have not been able to achieve yet.

Can't really see D7 at WTB. Probably at MCY when the extended runway is operational perhaps, thus to give "North Brisbane" (Maroochydore) and "South Brisbane" (Coolangatta) options.

QF 1st A380 repaint VH-OQF positioning back to SYD on the 11th of April. Scheduled to depart 1020 DXB local arriving SYD 0620 local on the 12th of April.

EK413

EK413 wrote:

QF 1st A380 repaint VH-OQF positioning back to SYD on the 11th of April. Scheduled to depart 1020 DXB local arriving SYD 0620 local on the 12th of April.

EK413

Interesting that it´s OQF, I would have thought Nancy (QA) would be the first for obvious reasons. I don´t mean the QF32 subject, but this is number 6, I would have thought the earlier 5 would be first in for fresh paint first?

cougar15 wrote:

EK413 wrote:

QF 1st A380 repaint VH-OQF positioning back to SYD on the 11th of April. Scheduled to depart 1020 DXB local arriving SYD 0620 local on the 12th of April.

EK413

Interesting that it´s OQF, I would have thought Nancy (QA) would be the first for obvious reasons. I don´t mean the QF32 subject, but this is number 6, I would have thought the earlier 5 would be first in for fresh paint first?

Many assumed the 1st would’ve been -OQA obvious reasons but reality -OQA has the least amount of cycles as the aircraft was grounded 18+ months. I’ve just come across images of -OQC & that aircraft desperately needs a fresh coat.

https://instagram.com/p/BhQCRLqF5Mp/

EK413

Sitting on QF10 PER-MEL and there is literally 4 of us in premium economy... I think it goes to show just how PER-centric this flight is! Pretty spectacular to have a whole row across to myself.

Obzerva wrote:

People seem to think that joining an alliance is free, there are massive costs for joining an alliance, and not a single airline has done that in the last 3 years. The move is towards more tailored relationships, hence my suggestion for striking a deal with GA. That would be two fold, it would give access to a large market close to Australia, and also head off any competition from Indonesian low cost carriers to Australia.

A350OZ wrote:

Your point about GA is a good example: it sure would make sense from a VA perspective and from a GA perspective also. But I am sure SQ won't support this at all. They have most to loose here given they would currently receive the lions share of the premium Velocity-affiliated customers. So it's not going to happen.

So I think there is no good solution for VA, only ones that are less bad than others.

planemanofnz wrote:

While SQ would be pissed off about this, it's only a minority shareholder, so it probably couldn't block it. Though, it could hurt VA in other ways.

GA might also try to stop this from happening, given its SkyTeam membership with AF-KL, and its current dominance at DPS relative to others.

This may or may not be dated, but VA and GA are one of the few baggage through-check interline partners (if bought on the same ticket).

https://www.virginaustralia.com/au/en/e ... -partners/

redroo wrote:

If virgin want to be on the global scene and capture any of the high yielding corporate traffic then it needs to be in one of the alliances IMHO. Aussies travel so much internationally and right now the virgin proposition is a mess.

On the other hand they could give up the global ambitions and just be an Australian airline.

There's really not much options for VA if JB is to move away from his no alliance policy. Oneworld (due to the big brother) and Star Alliance (veto from NZ and UA) are definitely not options for VA.

There's only SkyTeam (with their long time buddies DL), or the more expensive option of folding TT back into VA and reverting the whole operation back as a Domestic/Trans-Tasman/Pacific Island LCC by taking TT's place in the Value Alliance with the Asian LCCs.

As posted by others, VA could do with more partners if JB is to continue staying away from the major alliances. E.g Looking at interline options with the other European carriers at HKG (in addition to their existing interline agreement at HKG with VS)

sq256 wrote:

There's really not much options for VA if JB is to move away from his no alliance policy. Oneworld (due to the big brother) and Star Alliance (veto from NZ and UA) are definitely not options for VA.

There's only SkyTeam (with their long time buddies DL), or the more expensive option of folding TT back into VA and reverting the whole operation back as a Domestic/Trans-Tasman/Pacific Island LCC by taking TT's place in the Value Alliance with the Asian LCCs.

As posted by others, VA could do with more partners if JB is to continue staying away from the major alliances. E.g Looking at interline options with the other European carriers at HKG (in addition to their existing interline agreement at HKG with VS)

You think shareholders EY and SQ would let VA join SkyTeam? By your logic, MU would also veto if VA wanted to join SkyTeam given VA's partnership with HNA in China. To say SkyTeam is any closer than Star Alliance is quite far fetched.

VA cannot join any alliance if their ownership structure does not change. But if any of the shareholders gain control, things can change very quickly. What EY does may be crucial as they are getting increasingly close to LH. Would the debt ridden HNA sell is next?

TN486 wrote:

ben175 wrote:

Sitting on QF10 PER-MEL and there is literally 4 of us in premium economy... I think it goes to show just how PER-centric this flight is! Pretty spectacular to have a whole row across to myself.

Umm, do you think travelling on a weekend might make a difference, especially on a sat evening??

Flying on a Saturday definitely a factor.

EK413

ben175 wrote:

Sitting on QF10 PER-MEL and there is literally 4 of us in premium economy... I think it goes to show just how PER-centric this flight is! Pretty spectacular to have a whole row across to myself.

Umm, do you think travelling on a weekend might make a difference, especially on a sat evening??

xiaotung wrote:

sq256 wrote:

There's really not much options for VA if JB is to move away from his no alliance policy. Oneworld (due to the big brother) and Star Alliance (veto from NZ and UA) are definitely not options for VA.

There's only SkyTeam (with their long time buddies DL), or the more expensive option of folding TT back into VA and reverting the whole operation back as a Domestic/Trans-Tasman/Pacific Island LCC by taking TT's place in the Value Alliance with the Asian LCCs.

As posted by others, VA could do with more partners if JB is to continue staying away from the major alliances. E.g Looking at interline options with the other European carriers at HKG (in addition to their existing interline agreement at HKG with VS)

You think shareholders EY and SQ would let VA join SkyTeam? By your logic, MU would also veto if VA wanted to join SkyTeam given VA's partnership with HNA in China. To say SkyTeam is any closer than Star Alliance is quite far fetched.

VA cannot join any alliance if their ownership structure does not change. But if any of the shareholders gain control, things can change very quickly. What EY does may be crucial as they are getting increasingly close to LH. Would the debt ridden HNA sell is next?

EY is also debt ridden, and there's been as many news articles raising the question whether EY will also sell their VA stake. If SQ was more serious about making inroads into AU, they would've bought a larger stake into VA when the opportunities came up (NZ, etc). Considering SQ haven't really increased their stake for a long time now suggests they're comfortable with the status quo and are not interested in further involvement.

The question is whether EY and/or HNA will sell. The usual suspects of SQ and DL are usually mentioned as interested buyers although none of either party has officially said anything.

Also, even if SQ were to take a larger stake in VA. SQ may be good terms with JB, but JB and Luxon (NZ) still despise each other. Which is enough for NZ to veto SQ or anyone else attempting to sponsor VA into Star Alliance

In addition to a NZ veto, UA still hasn't forgotten the decision by JB's predecessor BG to drop the ticketing interline arrangement between DJ and UA over a decade ago in favour of setting up the (eventual long term) partnership with DL when they first set up VAustralia (as it was known then). VA doesn't even honour UA baggage interlines. (e.g passengers need to collect bags and re-check in) is how hostile that relationship is.

Only chance of VA joining *A is JB being replaced (which has been attempted before and failed), and paying any penalties to cancel the DL JV.

ben175 wrote:

Sitting on QF10 PER-MEL and there is literally 4 of us in premium economy... I think it goes to show just how PER-centric this flight is! Pretty spectacular to have a whole row across to myself.

Not sure you can judge one flight on a saturday night. Also havent you thought many passengers might be either stopping over for the weekend and are actually booked on alternate services

Ex TT A320 -VNJ arrived back in Perth tonight wearing VARA colours.

waoz1 wrote:

ben175 wrote:

Sitting on QF10 PER-MEL and there is literally 4 of us in premium economy... I think it goes to show just how PER-centric this flight is! Pretty spectacular to have a whole row across to myself.

Not sure you can judge one flight on a saturday night. Also havent you thought many passengers might be either stopping over for the weekend and are actually booked on alternate services

Might add that the MEL-PER sector yesterday was full in all classes.

EK413