AA to fly LAX/SYD; Qantas returns to SFO/SYD

[Isochronous]

Why do people keep suggesting BER? Its not a business destination and never will be.

Because EK can't go there themselves so QF would get all their feed

 

[Mattg]

Because EK can't go there themselves so QF would get all their feed

In a couple of years time, the number of passengers flying into/out of Berlin is expected to reach 30 million/year. That's more than DUS and double that of HAM - both of which EK currently fly to.

 

[Himeno]

Why do people keep suggesting BER? Its not a business destination and never will be.

EK has used all the capacity they are allowed in to Germany. QF could start a route into Germany via DXB and pick up all of the EK feed to that city.

 

[smit0847]

EK has used all the capacity they are allowed in to Germany. QF could start a route into Germany via DXB and pick up all of the EK feed to that city.

And its a OW hub!

 

[moa999]

Is there a reason however that EK uses all its capacity to fly to cities other than Berlin.. Presuumably more Business traffic makes them more viable

 

[TheBOSman]

People suggest where they want to go on holiday

I demand MEL-AUS (Austin, TX) nonstop, it is only an hour further than SYD-DFW, and AUS is actually closer to Australia than DFW is! We already have BA service too, so you could add SYD-AUS-LHR as an option for getting to the UK .

 

[jsoprano]

Is there a reason however that EK uses all its capacity to fly to cities other than Berlin.. Presuumably more Business traffic makes them more viable

Yes, more premium-heavy traffic to the other ports. Under the bilateral they are allowed 4 destinations of their choice, which is FRA, MUC, DUS and HAM. And because it is a bilateral agreement between countries (Germany & UAE), other airlines from the UAE (read: Etihad) are stuck with those possible destinations too (they don't fly to HAM though).

 

[Mattg]

Yes, more premium-heavy traffic to the other ports. Under the bilateral they are allowed 4 destinations of their choice, which is FRA, MUC, DUS and HAM. And because it is a bilateral agreement between countries (Germany & UAE), other airlines from the UAE (read: Etihad) are stuck with those possible destinations too (they don't fly to HAM though).

So that's why EY doesn't fly to Berlin (but QR does). Interestingly though AB flies TXL-AUH twice daily, with EY of course codesharing on those services.

 

[dajop]

And its a OW hub!

A hub of a one world partner that is perhaps not that strategically attractive for QF to feed traffic to given who AB's largest shareholder is (both in context of their partnership with EK, and in the context of one other airline EY has significant holdings in.)

 

[Himeno]

The application for the replacement, expansion and extension of the existing JV is up on the ACCC website. Qantas Airways Limited and American Airlines Group Inc. - Revocation and Substitution - A91502 & A91503

 

[Geoffrey]

How long from now before the flights are open for booking, you guys think?

 

[Mattg]

How long from now before the flights are open for booking, you guys think?

My guess is 1-2 weeks. There hasn't been an official date announced though AFAIK.

 

[Himeno]

My guess is 1-2 weeks. There hasn't been an official date announced though AFAIK.

AA said the day of the announcement that they wouldn't load the flights until they had the government approvals. For the flights themselves, that's not a problem. It's the renewal of the ATI process with ACCC and DOT that will cause delays.

 

[UP4014]

Re: About time - some real competition USA-AU OW

QF had plenty of 744 available at the time to fly both routes if they wanted to (and the retirement of the 744 was not mandatory). If SYD-SFO was successful, they would have flown both. As simple as that. QF media are always going to put some silver lining on any failure if they can.

Agee, I think it was more to do with the rules about number of destinations, either Dallas or SFO, but by letting AA in to sydney they can ask for SFO back.

QF did drop the ball and good SFO is back.

 

[JonNYC]

AA said the day of the announcement that they wouldn't load the flights until they had the government approvals. For the flights themselves, that's not a problem. It's the renewal of the ATI process with ACCC and DOT that will cause delays.

Yeah-- it's gonna be a while.

 

[fjc]

That's great. I'll be booking for May / June 2016, but nothing up on the schedule at present.

 

[hutch]

Re: About time - some real competition USA-AU OW

Agee, I think it was more to do with the rules about number of destinations, either Dallas or SFO, but by letting AA in to sydney they can ask for SFO back.

QF did drop the ball and good SFO is back.

What 'rules' are you referring too?

 

[Himeno]

Re: About time - some real competition USA-AU OW

What 'rules' are you referring too?

There may have been port limits in the US before open skies, which could have required dropping SFO to start DFW service, but that change was made in 2011, long after open skies was signed in 2008.

 

[kempvet]

Re: About time - some real competition USA-AU OW

Notice that a few posters are licking their lips about perhaps using AA EXP SWU's on AA metal SYD-LAX or LAX-SYD on the 77W's. My advice is do not get your hopes up too much.
If HKG-DFW is anything to go by, most of the flights don't have capacity for Y to J SWU's, I have seen some flights with no upgrades or at most only one.
AA have also taken the Thru passenger off the top of the wait list and now the wait list is solely based on time stamp of the booking, in other worlds SAN-LAX-SYD no longer is rated higher on the wait list than LAX-SYD.

 

[pauly7]

Yeah-- it's gonna be a while.

Yes especially since AirNZ are shrieking to the government to protect them - was in the press today they are looking to delay the QF/AA partnership.