Air New Zealand has grown considerably with the incorporation of the new Boeing 787-9 Dreamliners has optimized its routes and doors to new markets, in recent years have launched routes such as Tokyo Haneda, Houston (IAH), Buenos Aires (EZE) and soon Chicago (ORD), also has strong partners in its alliance with Star Alliance as Lufthansa, Singapore Airlines, United Airlines, Air China, All Nippon Airways, among others which has helped NZ to enter new markets

In North America EWR, IAD and YYZ are strong Star Alliance territories dominated by United Airlines (EWR and IAD) and Air Canada (YYZ) are strong destinations, IAD and YYZ are possible with the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, and NZ is looking for the perfect aircraft to start to fly to EWR, my favorite option is the Boeing 777-8X

In South America GRU and GIG are very potential destinations, and both can be made with the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, apart from having their partner Avianca Brazil in recent years grown considerably, offering more connections in Brazil and South America

In Asia, the economy in Japan is rising and the demand is growing considerably, it would be a good option to maintain the service to Osaka (KIX) throughout the year, Seoul (ICN) is another potential destination, tourism has increased between the two regions and AKL and ICN are Star Alliance territories, the economy in India is on fire, the passenger volume has increased drastically and many passengers heading to New Zealand use the hubs of Dubai, Doha, Singopore, Hong Kong, Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, among others, the Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner can fly this route, apart from Delhi being a Star Alliance territory

In Africa Addis Ababa and Johannesburg are the hubs of Star Alliance but the problem of these destinations is the altitude of both airports, the Boeing 777-8X is able to fly these routes, in ADD is a great Hub Ethiopian Airlines offer multiple destinations and offers too many connections, JNB is a very important financial center and in New Zealand there is a considerable population of South African descendants

In Europe, many German tourists visit New Zealand and for many years Air New Zealand flew to Frankfurt, with a superefficient team like the Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner could use their LAX Hub to fly directly AKL-LAX-FRA and could help Lufthansa to increase its capacity in LAX, an option would be to maintain all year long the Airbus A380 on the MUC-LAX route, and with respect to FRA-LAX three daily Lufthansa flights with the Airbus A340-600 and Boeing 747-8i and Air New Zealand with Boeing 787

Regarding your fleet I would like you to add the Boeing 787-10 Dreamliners that would be perfect for your missions in Asia for destinations such as Singapore, Tokyo, Shanghai and Hong Kong , which would free several Boeing 787-9 for ultra long-range missions

For its new ultra long radio missions, I prefer the Boeing 777-8X but the Airbus A350-1000XWB is a great candidate to fulfill many of its missions. The Boeing 777-9X I see in the distant future to replace the fleet of boeing 777-300ER

What are your expectations for Air New Zealand

It's also worth considering potential short-haul routes for NZ too - your initial post only covered long-haul routes.

For example:



CBR and HBA (as well as all other secondary Australian airports) are unlikely now, IMHO, given the QF deal.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

CBR and HBA (as well as all other secondary Australian airports) are unlikely now, IMHO, given the QF deal.

Cheers,

C.

Don't be too quick to jump the gun on that. Some reliable sources have indicated quite the opposite may well be in store with regards to expansion across the ditch.

NZ have said that the 789 can’t fly GRU-AKL with a viable payload and will wait for a decision on the 778/A350 which are under consideration to replace the 772 fleet from 2022 the 787 of some sort could also be used, re routes NZ will increase EZE to daily anyway year round before adding a new destination so 2022/23 seems a reasonable timeframe, EZE started DEC 2015.

Japan and Korea can be fickle, if something happens like a down turn or natural disaster people seem to travel less understandably so. Japan is doing well with HND on board and a seasonal KIX plus daily year round NRT and a partnership with ANA, maybe KIX year round and they will try and increase HND bilateral permitting, maybe an ANA service aswell?

ICN is a star hub with OZ but KE dominates the AKL-ICN market and NZ typically pick markets with less or no competition, more like an OZ operated route imo.

As to India it is better served via SIN which NZ/SQ will increase to 3x daily which offers connections to multiple destinations in India so any non stop service from AKL would be years off. AI on the other hand?

TPE is also starting in November which is a BR hub, CI operate AKL- BNE-TPE so NZ are looking to take an opportunity with a non stop service. I wonder if CI will respond.

Africa the only reasonable prospect is JNB and only if it can be done non stop from AKL, JNB’s altitude could be a potential issue but would be made possible with an A350ULR or 778, not saying it will happen though, for now a good partnership with SA via PER.

For Europe NZ have explicitly said no more 1 stop flights, to long to expensive and aircraft can be better used in the pacific rim which is anywhere that can be served non stop from AKL. There are a multitude of airlines NZ parter with you mentioned that can get you one stop to Europe without NZ having to send their own aircraft there.

In terms of fleet we could see some 787-10’s added for Asia, weather these go to leisure routes like SGN, DPS, PER, HNL, KIX and maybe others or weather they go more premium potentially for HKG, SIN, HND, NRT maybe PVG.

Personally I think one manufacturer for long haul so a small fleet of 778’s for ULH. I could possibly see these used in regular long haul routes depending on economic benefits of doing so otherwise a small fleet of 779’s maybe which isn’t that much bigger than a 77W.

Of course they could go A359 and then A35K to replace the 77W fleet aswell. Time will tell.

NZ aren't going to configure a 789 with 236 seats like Qantas any time soon. It's not an option for YYZ/IAD/EWR or for GRU. On the numbers the A359 is the most obvious option for next long-haul type.

RainerBoeing777 wrote:

In South America GRU and GIG are very potential destinations, and both can be made with the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, apart from having their partner Avianca Brazil in recent years grown considerably, offering more connections in Brazil and South America

Other than membership on *A, NZ and O6 don't have any special partnership - or have I missed anything? In fact, they don't even serve a common airport where to transfer passengers.

ZK-NBT wrote:

As to India it is better served via SIN which NZ/SQ will increase to 3x daily which offers connections to multiple destinations in India so any non stop service from AKL would be years off. AI on the other hand?

Being in the middle of a very messy sell-off, AI is unlikely to announce any major new long hauls in the short term. Even when it resumes expansion, LAX and Africa connections are far up on the priorities list. AKL would make sense given expansion beyond SYD / MEL and NZ's own Indian origin population, but it will probably have to wait. I imagine a 3x weekly DEL-AKL will be the launch flight whenever it happens, given DEL is the lead AI hub.

The other option on the route from the India end is 9W. Given that its east bound connectivity from India is as yet limited to HKG, BKK and SIN, I doubt an AKL connection will pop up anytime soon. Also, 9W is likely to launch any new destinations from its lead hub in BOM. I believe that the bulk of the Indian population in NZ is from northern India, which is DEL territory anyway, making BOM a bit undesirable.

On the codesharing front, NZ, TG, SQ and AI, all Star members, already have a decent amount of co-operation going on, with SIN leading the transfer market. The next best airport in terms of connectivity to India is BKK. It would be interesting to see if NZ-AI strike a deal for codeshares through SYD/MEL, which AI serves from DEL 5x and 3x weekly resp with onward connections to EU.

pg89 wrote:

I imagine a 3x weekly DEL-AKL will be the launch flight whenever it happens, given DEL is the lead AI hub.

Under the India - New Zealand ASA, NZ can only serve BOM - not DEL. New Zealand has struggled to renegotiate the ASA.

pg89 wrote:

The other option on the route from the India end is 9W.

NZ is ending its partnership with 9W next month (which is FFP based). 9W is also a QF partner, so I don't see this happening.

Cheers,

C.

ZK-NBT wrote:

TPE is also starting in November which is a BR hub ...

I'm very surprised that BR isn't code-sharing on NZ's AKL - TPE flight - in fact, there seems to be no co-operation at all?

BR would be a nice alternative for NZ customers to connect to China, Europe and elsewhere on, with their good product.

Cheers,

C.

ZK-NBT wrote:

ICN is a star hub with OZ but KE dominates the AKL-ICN market and NZ typically pick markets with less or no competition, more like an OZ operated route imo.

I think that NZ should consider ICN, as AKL is crying out for additional services to Korea:

- Korea has the most unserved demand for travel to AKL of anywhere (as per AKL Airport)
- Korean arrivals to New Zealand grew by more than 8% in the past year, and tourism by 9%
- AKL has double the Korean population of BNE, and ~4-5x the Korean population of MEL

See:
- https://corporate.aucklandairport.co.nz ... sentations.
- https://www.tourismnewzealand.com/marke ... uth-korea/.

Cheers,

C.

ZK-NBT wrote:

I wonder if CI will respond.

They've just upgraded AKL to a 359, so that's a start. In terms of a non-stop flight though, I doubt that'll happen - only late last year, CI wrote this idea off:

Asked about the prospects of bringing in more feed for the London flight by offering a nonstop flight to Auckland, compared with the one-stop options via Australia being offered now, Chung said New Zealand was challenging from an aircraft utilisation perspective. “It’s not easy to handle even a daily fight to Auckland,” Chung said.

See: http://australianaviation.com.au/2017/1 ... roo-route/.

Cheers,

C.

ZK-NBT wrote:

SGN, DPS

Actually, I'm not so sure about NZ expansion at those ports, in light of competition developments - DPS now has a daily year-round EK flight (superior product and schedules to NZ), while VN is rumoured to be launching SGN - PHE - AKL early next year.

It'll be very interesting to see whether NZ continues to push DPS, or decides to cut its losses and i) move DPS to another holiday port, like HKT, ii) move DPS to CGK, to get higher-yielding business traffic, or iii) uses the 789 capacity on existing routes.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

I'm very surprised that BR isn't code-sharing on NZ's AKL - TPE flight - in fact, there seems to be no co-operation at all?

BR would be a nice alternative for NZ customers to connect to China, Europe and elsewhere on, with their good product.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the CX agreement.

Re the 789's, as others have said they don't have the legs for GRU/GIG for NZ as the airline has a high leisure class layout and their cargo is very important. They've been disappointed with what the 789 can do on this front so I suspect this will give the A359 the edge when it comes to the 77E replacement and likewise the A35X for the 77W. The 778 is too much plane and too heavy for their requirement as is the 779.

Motorhussy wrote:

planemanofnz wrote:

I'm very surprised that BR isn't code-sharing on NZ's AKL - TPE flight - in fact, there seems to be no co-operation at all?

BR would be a nice alternative for NZ customers to connect to China, Europe and elsewhere on, with their good product.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the CX agreement.

I don't think so - AFAIK, the CX - NZ agreement is restricted only to Hong Kong - New Zealand flights - nothing else (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

Motorhussy wrote:

planemanofnz wrote:

I'm very surprised that BR isn't code-sharing on NZ's AKL - TPE flight - in fact, there seems to be no co-operation at all?

BR would be a nice alternative for NZ customers to connect to China, Europe and elsewhere on, with their good product.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the CX agreement.

I don't think so - AFAIK, the CX - NZ agreement is restricted only to Hong Kong - New Zealand flights - nothing else (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Cheers,

C.

no only restricted to HKG
but CX and NZ could have a gentleman's agreement....

planemanofnz wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

SGN, DPS

Actually, I'm not so sure about NZ expansion at those ports, in light of competition developments - DPS now has a daily year-round EK flight (superior product and schedules to NZ), while VN is rumoured to be launching SGN - PHE - AKL early next year.

It'll be very interesting to see whether NZ continues to push DPS, or decides to cut its losses and i) move DPS to another holiday port, like HKT, ii) move DPS to CGK, to get higher-yielding business traffic, or iii) uses the 789 capacity on existing routes.

Cheers,

C.

Cut what losses? I wonder what EK bookings are looking like so far beyond winter peak to DPS? Superior product? 7 abreast J and 10 abreast Y remember.

VN PHE-AKL seems like a pipe dream, I really can’t see it. SGN-AKL on the other hand I’m surprised we haven’t seen.

Surely GA would have gone ahead with CGK-AKL if yields were there? Bit of a back track but SQ fly 9 daily or something to CGK.

Motorhussy wrote:

planemanofnz wrote:

I'm very surprised that BR isn't code-sharing on NZ's AKL - TPE flight - in fact, there seems to be no co-operation at all?

BR would be a nice alternative for NZ customers to connect to China, Europe and elsewhere on, with their good product.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the CX agreement.

Re the 789's, as others have said they don't have the legs for GRU/GIG for NZ as the airline has a high leisure class layout and their cargo is very important. They've been disappointed with what the 789 can do on this front so I suspect this will give the A359 the edge when it comes to the 77E replacement and likewise the A35X for the 77W. The 778 is too much plane and too heavy for their requirement as is the 779.

I’m not sure they have been disappointed with what the 789 can do? I thought they always knew it wouldn’t make GRU-AKL anyway with 302 or even 275 seats.

Isn’t NZ taking delivery of two new 789 this year? Will TPE and ORD absorb these frames?

smi0006 wrote:

Isn’t NZ taking delivery of two new 789 this year? Will TPE and ORD absorb these frames?

Yes 2 more this year, Pretty much yes these frames are absorbed by TPE and ORD. Maybe the odd increase in other routes not a lot of slack there.

I doubt FRA is on the list. Air NZ leadership have been pretty clear on no 2 stop routes except for the existing AKL-LAX-LHR. And that largely survives because LAX-LHR gets a fair chunk of service by itself.

Air NZ are heading the same way most carriers are now going and that's non stop point to point flights from a hub.

ZK-NBT wrote:

I wonder what EK bookings are looking like so far beyond winter peak to DPS?

EK has cited strong demand on the route - see my post in the New Zealand Aviation Thread. And, unlike NZ, it doesn't have to fill up the plane on just AKL - DPS traffic - it can rely on AKL - Europe traffic too, which is huge and removes some of the seasonality sensitivity which you were getting at.

ZK-NBT wrote:

Superior product? 7 abreast J and 10 abreast Y remember.

Yes, a superior product, given:

- 10 abreast in Y on a 77W is largely as bad as 9 abreast in Y on a 789
- EK offers free meals, IFE, amenity kits, in-flight magazines - the perks
- EK's top product is F Class, whereas NZ's is just the old herringbone

ZK-NBT wrote:

VN PHE-AKL seems like a pipe dream, I really can’t see it. SGN-AKL on the other hand I’m surprised we haven’t seen.

I agree that PHE - AKL is unlikely, though I'd argue that VN to AKL is likely.

ZK-NBT wrote:

Surely GA would have gone ahead with CGK-AKL if yields were there?

No - GA is in serious financial difficulty at the moment. They're not a threat.

Cheers,

C.

pg89 wrote:

I imagine a 3x weekly DEL-AKL will be the launch flight whenever it happens, given DEL is the lead AI hub.

Last year, this route was "Skyscanner Unserved Route of the Week" - anna.aero reported:

Skyscanner demand on this week’s unserved route shows a preference towards the Auckland end of the city pair, with a 63/37 split, so on this basis we looked at potential carriers at the New Zealand origin first. “47% of total passengers travelling to Auckland from India were originating in Delhi,” adds Singh.

Therefore, it would seem that this route may be more suited to NZ than AI - here's hoping!

See: http://www.anna.aero/2017/11/22/del-akl ... -searches/.

Of course, the main stumbling block is the ASA restricting NZ to BOM, but this may change.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

I wonder what EK bookings are looking like so far beyond winter peak to DPS?

EK has cited strong demand on the route - see my post in the New Zealand Aviation Thread. And, unlike NZ, it doesn't have to fill up the plane on just AKL - DPS traffic - it can rely on AKL - Europe traffic too, which is huge and removes some of the seasonality sensitivity which you were getting at.

ZK-NBT wrote:

Superior product? 7 abreast J and 10 abreast Y remember.

Yes, a superior product, given:

- 10 abreast in Y on a 77W is largely as bad as 9 abreast in Y on a 789
- EK offers free meals, IFE, amenity kits, in-flight magazines - the perks
- EK's top product is F Class, whereas NZ's is just the old herringbone

ZK-NBT wrote:

VN PHE-AKL seems like a pipe dream, I really can’t see it. SGN-AKL on the other hand I’m surprised we haven’t seen.

I agree that PHE - AKL is unlikely, though I'd argue that VN to AKL is likely.

ZK-NBT wrote:

Surely GA would have gone ahead with CGK-AKL if yields were there?

No - GA is in serious financial difficulty at the moment. They're not a threat.

Cheers,

C.

1. Sure EK are seeing strong demand and it might even be good for Europe-NZ when people decide they can spend a few days in DPS on the way. I’m not sure NZ will just drop the route, it might get a bit more like HNL and more competitive.

2. NZ sell seats to suit, it works, Y class in probably equal 9 abreast 787 vs 10 abreast 777. As I say EK’s J on 777 is nothing to write home about. They may manage to sell a few F but how many just on AKL-DPS?

3. I agree VN SGN-AKL seems a good fit going forward.

4. GA were meant to fly to AKL in 2013 in better financial times, they seem to do well for a while and then the same old tricks of expanding to fast and corrupt management come back. Why didn’t they start AKL in 2013? I’d have thought they would have if yields were there? I’m just not sure NZ would go to CGK myself, SQ do something like 9 daily SIN-CGK which is a backtrack, how big is the market from AKL?

planemanofnz wrote:

[

ZK-NBT wrote:

Superior product? 7 abreast J and 10 abreast Y remember.

Yes, a superior product, given:

- 10 abreast in Y on a 77W is largely as bad as 9 abreast in Y on a 789
- EK offers free meals, IFE, amenity kits, in-flight magazines - the perks
- EK's top product is F Class, whereas NZ's is just the old herringbone

NZ offers all of those - apart from First Class, but do offer PE which EK currently doesn't.

Sure NZ sells un-bundled fares on AKL-DPS, but there is an choice to buy an fare with all the perks.

Really don't think there would be much of an F market on AKL-DPS, If i'm paying for an First Class ticket probably the last place in the world I'd be going was to an cheap hoilday in Bali.

zkncj wrote:

NZ offers all of those ...

Eh, no - no amenity kits in Y, for example?

My own view is that NZ will struggle to continue at DPS - while it faced competition at HNL from HA, EK is a different beast to HA - for example, EK offers a much more competitive schedule (daily and year-round flights). I'd love to be proven wrong, though.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

pg89 wrote:

I imagine a 3x weekly DEL-AKL will be the launch flight whenever it happens, given DEL is the lead AI hub.

Last year, this route was "Skyscanner Unserved Route of the Week" - anna.aero reported:

Skyscanner demand on this week’s unserved route shows a preference towards the Auckland end of the city pair, with a 63/37 split, so on this basis we looked at potential carriers at the New Zealand origin first. “47% of total passengers travelling to Auckland from India were originating in Delhi,” adds Singh.

Therefore, it would seem that this route may be more suited to NZ than AI - here's hoping!

See: http://www.anna.aero/2017/11/22/del-akl ... -searches/.

Of course, the main stumbling block is the ASA restricting NZ to BOM, but this may change.

Cheers,

C.

Ah yes, I remember that piece. Still, it strikes me as odd that NZ would choose to fly to DEL - its just too odd a choice given all the other hubs it doesn't serve in the Pacific rim.

AI already flies to plenty of destinations where ex-India demand is lower than ex-destination, so I don't see huge issues in them operating to NZ should the bilats be 'modi'-fied (bad pun intended).

AI won't be coming here IMHO until the questions regarding their future form / ops are answered. And they are big questions. Indeed, we presume they have a future.

NZ321 wrote:

AI won't be coming here IMHO until the questions regarding their future form / ops are answered. And they are big questions. Indeed, we presume they have a future.

Yes, we've already put that in as a disclaimer as of post #7.

Why can't people understand that just because an airline can/wants to expand it won't suddenly go to every destination within reach? IAD and GIG are very surprising choices if they happen. I'd expect to see YUL before either of those, and I don't expect them to add YUL. ADD is damn near impossible. JNB could happen, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Expect them to add CDG before FRA. Also I have to say DEL isn't a strong possibility either. DXB is far more likely than at least 4 of your propositions tbh.

OA940 wrote:

Why can't people understand that just because an airline can/wants to expand it won't suddenly go to every destination within reach? IAD and GIG are very surprising choices if they happen. I'd expect to see YUL before either of those, and I don't expect them to add YUL. ADD is damn near impossible. JNB could happen, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Expect them to add CDG before FRA. Also I have to say DEL isn't a strong possibility either. DXB is far more likely than at least 4 of your propositions tbh.

GIG has been mentioned by the airline, GRU or GIG is likely. IAD I’ve no idea, YYZ would be more likely than YUL. Europe won’t happen at all but what would CDG as a sky team hub ever give them over FRA or MUC? BOM would be more likely than DEL but India seems unlikely, DXB what would flying 17 hrs to EK’s megahub do? Never gonna happen.

planemanofnz wrote:

zkncj wrote:

NZ offers all of those ...

Eh, no - no amenity kits in Y, for example?

My own view is that NZ will struggle to continue at DPS - while it faced competition at HNL from HA, EK is a different beast to HA - for example, EK offers a much more competitive schedule (daily and year-round flights). I'd love to be proven wrong, though.

Cheers,

C.

Does the average passenger really care about getting an amenity kit? Bali is an budget market - expectations will be low.

ZK-NBT wrote:

OA940 wrote:

Why can't people understand that just because an airline can/wants to expand it won't suddenly go to every destination within reach? IAD and GIG are very surprising choices if they happen. I'd expect to see YUL before either of those, and I don't expect them to add YUL. ADD is damn near impossible. JNB could happen, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Expect them to add CDG before FRA. Also I have to say DEL isn't a strong possibility either. DXB is far more likely than at least 4 of your propositions tbh.

GIG has been mentioned by the airline, GRU or GIG is likely. IAD I’ve no idea, YYZ would be more likely than YUL. Europe won’t happen at all but what would CDG as a sky team hub ever give them over FRA or MUC? BOM would be more likely than DEL but India seems unlikely, DXB what would flying 17 hrs to EK’s megahub do? Never gonna happen.

Didn't they mention GRU only? Plus, considering many European airlines can't make GIG work easily, I doubt ULH from New Zealand will end well.

IAD I think is too small of a destination to go to.

I don't get why the 789 can make it to YYZ and not NYC, but whatever. If it can then ANZ should do it. I doubt it'll work with the 778, at least initially.

India does seem quite likely, but idk why BOM would be better than DEL. Genuine question here, why do you think this. Am I missing a partnership or something?

CDG or FRA are unlikely before their NA expansion, but if they'd do one I'd expect Paris because it's a bigger market.

DXB would also offer them connection opportunities, assuming they wanna partner up with EK. Also a pretty big market.

In general tho I'm surprised they don't have more destinations in Asia. I would expand there first before anywhere else. It's far closer and presumably easier to establish routes there.

OA940 wrote:

India does seem quite likely, but idk why BOM would be better than DEL. Genuine question here, why do you think this. Am I missing a partnership or something?

Ref. to the earlier posts here - BOM is the only Indian airport the current ASA between India and NZ allows flights to. DEL is, in all likelihood, a better traffic source, but it won't be permitted till the ASA is changed.

OA940 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

OA940 wrote:

Why can't people understand that just because an airline can/wants to expand it won't suddenly go to every destination within reach? IAD and GIG are very surprising choices if they happen. I'd expect to see YUL before either of those, and I don't expect them to add YUL. ADD is damn near impossible. JNB could happen, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Expect them to add CDG before FRA. Also I have to say DEL isn't a strong possibility either. DXB is far more likely than at least 4 of your propositions tbh.

GIG has been mentioned by the airline, GRU or GIG is likely. IAD I’ve no idea, YYZ would be more likely than YUL. Europe won’t happen at all but what would CDG as a sky team hub ever give them over FRA or MUC? BOM would be more likely than DEL but India seems unlikely, DXB what would flying 17 hrs to EK’s megahub do? Never gonna happen.

Didn't they mention GRU only? Plus, considering many European airlines can't make GIG work easily, I doubt ULH from New Zealand will end well.

IAD I think is too small of a destination to go to.

I don't get why the 789 can make it to YYZ and not NYC, but whatever. If it can then ANZ should do it. I doubt it'll work with the 778, at least initially.

India does seem quite likely, but idk why BOM would be better than DEL. Genuine question here, why do you think this. Am I missing a partnership or something?

CDG or FRA are unlikely before their NA expansion, but if they'd do one I'd expect Paris because it's a bigger market.

DXB would also offer them connection opportunities, assuming they wanna partner up with EK. Also a pretty big market.

In general tho I'm surprised they don't have more destinations in Asia. I would expand there first before anywhere else. It's far closer and presumably easier to establish routes there.

GIG has been mentioned but I don’t see both it and GRU, GIG maybe more accessible? It a bit closer? To lazy to check.

IAD has never been mentioned but NYC, LAS, DEN have, and probably IAD as you say is to small but it is a UA hub.

I don’t think anyone said the 789 can make YYZ?

India is long haul and low yielding, big market but probably better served via SIN with SQ for the next decade or more atleast imo.

NZ have said they won’t do more one stop flights, Not sure I’d have thought Germany was a bigger market to NZ than France and FRA/MUC have LH as star hubs, CDG would never happen even if it was a bigger market before FRA, moot point anyway.

DXB a pretty big market? From NZ? It’s a lot bigger than it was with EK’s presence here now but people only go there and stop on there way to Europe, hardly any from NZ will visit the Middle East for more than a few days as a stop over.

Asia is lower yielding than the US, and more competitive hence any markets NZ might be interested in are served by competitors.

ZK-NBT wrote:

Asia is lower yielding than the US, and more competitive hence any markets NZ might be interested in are served by competitors.

There are still a few of Asian options for NZ, like CGK or NGO, which would be monopoly routes (which NZ loves).

Cheers,

C.

I'm not sure about India. Too far and I doubt the yields make it worthwhile. Much better off flying to SIN and using the SQ network to get passengers to a number of destinations rather than choosing one or in this case having one chosen for you (BOM).

As for fleet I see an A350-900 order to replace the 772ER with an A350-1000 order at a later date when 773ER retirements start. That will give them a nice mainline fleet of A32S/787/A350.

ZK-NBT wrote:

OA940 wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

GIG has been mentioned by the airline, GRU or GIG is likely. IAD I’ve no idea, YYZ would be more likely than YUL. Europe won’t happen at all but what would CDG as a sky team hub ever give them over FRA or MUC? BOM would be more likely than DEL but India seems unlikely, DXB what would flying 17 hrs to EK’s megahub do? Never gonna happen.

Didn't they mention GRU only? Plus, considering many European airlines can't make GIG work easily, I doubt ULH from New Zealand will end well.

IAD I think is too small of a destination to go to.

I don't get why the 789 can make it to YYZ and not NYC, but whatever. If it can then ANZ should do it. I doubt it'll work with the 778, at least initially.

India does seem quite likely, but idk why BOM would be better than DEL. Genuine question here, why do you think this. Am I missing a partnership or something?

CDG or FRA are unlikely before their NA expansion, but if they'd do one I'd expect Paris because it's a bigger market.

DXB would also offer them connection opportunities, assuming they wanna partner up with EK. Also a pretty big market.

In general tho I'm surprised they don't have more destinations in Asia. I would expand there first before anywhere else. It's far closer and presumably easier to establish routes there.

GIG has been mentioned but I don’t see both it and GRU, GIG maybe more accessible? It a bit closer? To lazy to check.

IAD has never been mentioned but NYC, LAS, DEN have, and probably IAD as you say is to small but it is a UA hub.

I don’t think anyone said the 789 can make YYZ?

India is long haul and low yielding, big market but probably better served via SIN with SQ for the next decade or more atleast imo.

NZ have said they won’t do more one stop flights, Not sure I’d have thought Germany was a bigger market to NZ than France and FRA/MUC have LH as star hubs, CDG would never happen even if it was a bigger market before FRA, moot point anyway.

DXB a pretty big market? From NZ? It’s a lot bigger than it was with EK’s presence here now but people only go there and stop on there way to Europe, hardly any from NZ will visit the Middle East for more than a few days as a stop over.

Asia is lower yielding than the US, and more competitive hence any markets NZ might be interested in are served by competitors.

GRU is closer to NZ than GIG tho. And a larger airport, and I assume a higher-yielding market

Also I saw somewhere here that the 789 can make YYZ.

OA940 wrote:

Also I saw somewhere here that the 789 can make YYZ.

Issue will be whether it can do the westbound leg with the sort of payload NZ need to make a route pay. Maybe people are thinking of Perth-London as a model. But the QF ULH configuration carries 40 fewer pax than the NZ code 2 789s. Won't work for NZ.

OA940 wrote:

GRU is closer to NZ than GIG tho. And a larger airport, and I assume a higher-yielding market.

GRU is at a much higher altitude than GIG, which impacts aircraft performance on the long flight to AKL.

Cheers,

C.

AKL-GRU or GIG onboard the brand new tuna can? No thanks, I stay with SCL connexion option.

ojjunior wrote:

AKL-GRU or GIG onboard the brand new tuna can? No thanks, I stay with SCL connexion option.

You are aware that both LA and NZ use the same plane ex-AKL to South America, right? That is, the 787.

And while the Economy Class seats are largely the same, NZ's premium classes are far superior seat-wise.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

OA940 wrote:

GRU is closer to NZ than GIG tho. And a larger airport, and I assume a higher-yielding market.

GRU is at a much higher altitude than GIG, which impacts aircraft performance on the long flight to AKL.

Cheers,

C.

GRU is at 750m ASL. Is that high enough to affect performance significantly? After all, there are plenty of routes from GRU to the Middle East (DOH, DXB, TLV) that are as long or longer than AKL...

vhqpa wrote:

I'm not sure about India. Too far and I doubt the yields make it worthwhile. Much better off flying to SIN and using the SQ network to get passengers to a number of destinations rather than choosing one or in this case having one chosen for you (BOM).

As for fleet I see an A350-900 order to replace the 772ER with an A350-1000 order at a later date when 773ER retirements start. That will give them a nice mainline fleet of A32S/787/A350.

As long as its just BOM on the agreement, the route is a no-go for both AI & NZ.

It won't make much sense for NZ to work this route. They have no meaty onward connections to offer at the AKL end of the route, and anything they offer at the India end with AI will be one-upped by SIN/SQ.

AI, on the other hand, will still find a reasonable VFR base in AKL. Additionally, the city is a good addition to their fairly successful portfolio of long-haul nonstops, and AKL will add value for many of its EU (AI serves 11 destinations there) passengers looking for onward transit options. Take DEL-SYD for instance - despite pressure from Southeast Asian FSCs & LCCs, the service has not only survived, but has been up-gauged to 5x weekly. Not saying that AKL will go the same way, but there's a reasonable amount of precedent to work with.

pg89 wrote:

GRU is at 750m ASL. Is that high enough to affect performance significantly? After all, there are plenty of routes from GRU to the Middle East (DOH, DXB, TLV) that are as long or longer than AKL...

Yes, you're right - though, I think AKL - GRU might have a few operational intricacies like ETOPS, winds and other factors which make such a comparison not so straightforward (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Cheers,

C.

pg89 wrote:

As long as its just BOM on the agreement, the route is a no-go for both AI & NZ.

I could be wrong, but I think that the BOM restriction is just on NZ - not AI - so AI could operate DEL - AKL, if it wished to do so?

Given the low-yielding and long nature of the flight, I think it would be more suited to AI metal than NZ, particularly with AI's costs.

pg89 wrote:

AI, on the other hand, will still find a reasonable VFR base in AKL. Additionally, the city is a good addition to their fairly successful portfolio of long-haul nonstops ...

The problem AI has with AKL is that it can only be flown on 77L's, which are largely already used. BNE and PER aren't so limited.

PER is aggressively vying for Indian flights, while BNE - DEL was a 'Skyscanner route of the week' last year - options are plentiful.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

Yes, you're right - though, I think AKL - GRU might have a few operational intricacies like ETOPS, winds and other factors which make such a comparison not so straightforward (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

AKL-GRU flight path would basically be an extension of NZ's existing AKL-EZE operation. Given that the EZE flight seems to be working fine with South Pacific / Near Antarctic winds and ETOPS, I'm inclined to think an extra 2 hours of flying beyond EZE to GRU (which is a fairly well trodden route anyway) won't be too much of a technical issue.

I think the bigger issue is NZ's risk-averse network. A GRU service will undoubtedly receive tough competition from LATAM, who not only maintains hubs at both SCL and GRU, but also offers a larger bouquet of trans-Pacific connections from NZ and Australia. If NZ chooses to fly this route, it will face low fares on LATAM via SCL, and the swaying of transfer feeds from Aus towards the Qantas / LATAM combine.

NZ could choose to work a partnership at GRU with Avianca, a Star Alliance member, but I guess they are far more comfortable working with a more equal partner like AR at EZE?

pg89 wrote:

AKL-GRU flight path would basically be an extension of NZ's existing AKL-EZE operation. Given that the EZE flight seems to be working fine with South Pacific / Near Antarctic winds and ETOPS, I'm inclined to think an extra 2 hours of flying beyond EZE to GRU (which is a fairly well trodden route anyway) won't be too much of a technical issue.

AFAIK, additional reserve fuel is required on AKL - South America flights, due to the lack of en-route alternates, which limits range. Further complicating matters is that NZ uses / has used the Code 1 789 to EZE - AFAIK, the Code 1 789 couldn't make AKL - GRU, while the Code 2 789 would be too premium for GRU. Add to that, GRU's altitude, as well as winds for the route, and you have a situation which is not so black and white as comparing NZ on AKL - GRU to EK on DXB - GRU.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

pg89 wrote:

AKL-GRU flight path would basically be an extension of NZ's existing AKL-EZE operation. Given that the EZE flight seems to be working fine with South Pacific / Near Antarctic winds and ETOPS, I'm inclined to think an extra 2 hours of flying beyond EZE to GRU (which is a fairly well trodden route anyway) won't be too much of a technical issue.

AFAIK, additional reserve fuel is required on AKL - South America flights, due to the lack of en-route alternates, which limits range. Further complicating matters is that NZ uses / has used the Code 1 789 to EZE - AFAIK, the Code 1 789 couldn't make AKL - GRU, while the Code 2 789 would be too premium for GRU. Add to that, GRU's altitude, as well as winds for the route, and you have a situation which is not so black and white as comparing NZ on AKL - GRU to EK on DXB - GRU.

Cheers,

C.

Ah okay. Had no idea about this - thanks for the info!

pg89 wrote:

planemanofnz wrote:

pg89 wrote:

AKL-GRU flight path would basically be an extension of NZ's existing AKL-EZE operation. Given that the EZE flight seems to be working fine with South Pacific / Near Antarctic winds and ETOPS, I'm inclined to think an extra 2 hours of flying beyond EZE to GRU (which is a fairly well trodden route anyway) won't be too much of a technical issue.

AFAIK, additional reserve fuel is required on AKL - South America flights, due to the lack of en-route alternates, which limits range. Further complicating matters is that NZ uses / has used the Code 1 789 to EZE - AFAIK, the Code 1 789 couldn't make AKL - GRU, while the Code 2 789 would be too premium for GRU. Add to that, GRU's altitude, as well as winds for the route, and you have a situation which is not so black and white as comparing NZ on AKL - GRU to EK on DXB - GRU.

Cheers,

C.

Ah okay. Had no idea about this - thanks for the info!

No worries - in case you're interested, NZ management this month in their investor presentation have re-stated their interest in Brazil, and have referred to both GRU and GIG.

See page 65 of 75 of https://p-airnz.com/cms/assets/PDFs/201 ... script.pdf.

Cheers,

C.

RainerBoeing777 wrote:

Frankfurt

ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:

I doubt FRA is on the list ...

ZK-NBT wrote:

Europe won’t happen at all ...

OA940 wrote:

Expect them to add CDG before FRA ...

To clear this up for once and for all, NZ on 14 June said that "We won’t be trying to fly to new destinations in Europe or UK."

See page 23 of 75 of https://p-airnz.com/cms/assets/PDFs/201 ... script.pdf

Cheers,

C.

OA940 wrote:

... GIG ... very surprising choices if they happen.

GIG is being considered - on 14 June, NZ's CEO said (albeit with poor grammar): "I think ultimately Rio to Sao Paulo is a really interesting destination for us."

See page 65 of 75 of: https://p-airnz.com/cms/assets/PDFs/201 ... script.pdf.

Cheers,

C.