Any likelihood of Qantas returning to Frankfurt?

[Himeno]

What Oneworld needs desperately is a carrier based centrally in the EU, rather than all along the far edges as present.

In Europe (as defined under the oneworld fare product ticket rules), oneworld has BA, IB, AY, RJ, QR, AT and (soon) WY.
They had MA and AB in central Europe, but both died.

Is there even any other reasonable sized airlines in that part of Europe that aren't a low cost airline and not already a member of SkyTeam or Star?

 

[pangwen]

In Europe (as defined under the oneworld fare product ticket rules), oneworld has BA, IB, AY, RJ, QR, AT and (soon) WY.
They had MA and AB in central Europe, but both died.

Is there even any other reasonable sized airlines in that part of Europe that aren't a low cost airline and not already a member of SkyTeam or Star?

Depends on your definition of "reasonable sized" - Air Serbia perhaps?

However, this is because they have stated they don't want to join any of the three major alliances:

Air Serbia: No appetite to join alliance

Air Serbia expands partnerships with Star Alliance, Oneworld and SkyTeam but says joining either would be a disadvantage.

www.exyuaviation.com

 

[RooFlyer]

In Europe (as defined under the oneworld fare product ticket rules), oneworld has BA, IB, AY, RJ, QR, AT and (soon) WY.
They had MA and AB in central Europe, but both died.

Is there even any other reasonable sized airlines in that part of Europe that aren't a low cost airline and not already a member of SkyTeam or Star?

As to 1st bit, yes, exactly - every one of the listed current airlines describes a circle around continental Europe. That’s my point.

As to the second, if you qualify it that heavily, probably not. That doesn’t get away from the fact that they really need an airline within continental Europe from customer convenience point of view.

Ofcourse they’ll say they service things just fine just now, for instance with AY taking you to Helsinki then dropping you to verious spots across Europe. I’m doing that this Christmas. And they wouldn’t want another airline within Europe of course which would take away business from existing members - not going to happen. So QR, EK, TK and SQ will continue to provide the most efficient way to get from Australia to a destination within Continental Europe.

 

[SYD]

As to 1st bit, yes, exactly - every one of the listed current airlines describes a circle around continental Europe. That’s my point.

Circling the continent isn’t a bad thing if there’s a long haul feed into a hub and you can continue on without significant backtracking - which was always the downside of the QF/BA partnership.

As to the second, if you qualify it that heavily, probably not. That doesn’t get away from the fact that they really need an airline within continental Europe from customer convenience point of view.

Ideally something east/southern Europe - hypothetically ATH / IST.

Swinging back to topic. FRA is well into Western Europe.

Ofcourse they’ll say they service things just fine just now, for instance with AY taking you to Helsinki then dropping you to verious spots across Europe. I’m doing that this Christmas. And they wouldn’t want another airline within Europe of course which would take away business from existing members - not going to happen. So QR, EK, TK and SQ will continue to provide the most efficient way to get from Australia to a destination within Continental Europe.

Yes, TK will even be giving the ME3 a run for their money for Oz travellers.

But if you consider the American <-> Euro market (orders of magnitude greater than Oz/Nz flyers heading to Europe), OW probably think it’s fine. AY, BA, IB and now AT (maybe EI reentering) with AA/AS - there’s an awful lot of city pairs only 1 stop apart (no backtracking). BA alone has a huge footprint into the US and of course Europe.

As an aside, I didn’t realise Air Serbia survived the heady days of the EY federation (that included VA1.0 and AB).

 

[RooFlyer]

As an aside, I didn’t realise Air Serbia survived the heady days of the EY federation (that included VA1.0 and AB).

they have a very handy list of partnerships with other Airlines.

 

[justinbrett]

I’m not sure backtracking an hour or two is really such a problem, considering the number of people who happily fly to the US / South Africa via the Middle East or Asia.

For stand alone intra Euro travel, I’d say the days of intra Euro flights not associated with a long haul connection are numbered, especially in Western Europe.

 

[docjames]

They need significant premium O+D demand to make the direct flights to EU cities work.

Paris and London are draws on their own. LHR has the obvious connection benefits.

They’ll have plenty of demand data from their onward ticketed flights ex-LHR and codeshare operated flights (EK). So they have the data to work out where demand is viable.

MAD would be good for IB connection but feel not offering much in connection that LHR doesn’t currently offer them, nor with enough premium volume.

FRA, MUC or AMS probably most likely next on actual O+D demand. Germany an issue as wealth is spread and business travel equally likely to any of an umber of cities/regions. BER has been floated but a combo of less strong business demand and more leisure. ATH always floated due extended diaspora in Australia however low yield and quite seasonal. BUD similar - tourist and seasonal. NCE would do some volume but probably not enough and sent to CDG or LHR and connect more economic.

Perhaps BUD,ATH, Belgrade etc maybe better JQ options.

 

[OATEK]

Having been to DXB, I wouldn’t go that far. There are very few airports I have been to which I would apply such a moniker to: Frankfurt and Singapore would be the only two that come to my mind. Which I think is why Qantas won’t make a comeback to FRA

-RooFlyer88

If you have arrived at an A gate, and then have to find your way to a C gate for your next flight, you will soon get the drift of it being a long series of shopping malls.

FRA is good and central, but as others have said does not have the draw of Paris or Rome. I can't see BER ever being the destination, but time may prove me wrong. Given QF already have a tie up with LH, there would be opportunities for connections if their agreement was widened.

 

[justinbrett]

If you have arrived at an A gate, and then have to find your way to a C gate for your next flight, you will soon get the drift of it being a long series of shopping malls.

FRA is good and central, but as others have said does not have the draw of Paris or Rome. I can't see BER ever being the destination, but time may prove me wrong. Given QF already have a tie up with LH, there would be opportunities for connections if their agreement was widened.

Exactly my point (and my experience, my last flight was to CPT from the C gates and it was a complete zoo).

I don’t take too much notice of the poster you replied to, who holds LAX as the gold standard!

 

[azza_1992]

They need significant premium O+D demand to make the direct flights to EU cities work.

Paris and London are draws on their own. LHR has the obvious connection benefits.

They’ll have plenty of demand data from their onward ticketed flights ex-LHR and codeshare operated flights (EK). So they have the data to work out where demand is viable.

MAD would be good for IB connection but feel not offering much in connection that LHR doesn’t currently offer them, nor with enough premium volume.

FRA, MUC or AMS probably most likely next on actual O+D demand. Germany an issue as wealth is spread and business travel equally likely to any of an umber of cities/regions. BER has been floated but a combo of less strong business demand and more leisure. ATH always floated due extended diaspora in Australia however low yield and quite seasonal. BUD similar - tourist and seasonal. NCE would do some volume but probably not enough and sent to CDG or LHR and connect more economic.

Perhaps BUD,ATH, Belgrade etc maybe better JQ options.

What about ZRH? I'd think it would be up there on O+D demand. Plenty of premium leisure demand, especially in winter. And a decent amount of business travel.

 

[SYD]

What about ZRH? I'd think it would be up there on O+D demand. Plenty of premium leisure demand, especially in winter. And a decent amount of business travel.

and the flights would run like clockwork!

 

[RSD]

and the flights would run like clockwork!

Hang on - we are talking about Qantas International here!

 

[I love to travel]

and the flights would run like clockwork!

So many words could be said for this post, so little time

 

[cagiva]

What about ZRH? I'd think it would be up there on O+D demand. Plenty of premium leisure demand, especially in winter. And a decent amount of business travel.

That or MXP would be more central and always sought after destination

 

[RSD]

With Virgin now doing something to Doha then connecting with Qatar - who knows - QF might try something to Dubai to then connect into EK's network.

 

[WilsonM]

With Virgin now doing something to Doha then connecting with Qatar - who knows - QF might try something to Dubai to then connect into EK's network.

I think I'm feeling a little sense of deja-vu...

In reality - this won't happen again. QF is quite happy taking its cut from the EK codeshares, and offers a different option to its major centres in Europe.

The only reason VA is doing this is because QR wants to get around the air services agreement and subsequent government block on more flights. Great for customers, but I'd be willing to bet QR would've just preferred to run the flights themselves.

 

[Ansett Nostalgic]

I'd be very happy if we had some more options to DXB.

 

[bussyboy]

I'd be very happy if we had some more options to DXB.

And avoid the Qantas Emirates tax on premium rewards on EK flights

 

[RSD]

I'd be very happy if we had some more options to DXB.

Would suit me too - DSC's on the MEL-DXB leg of my trips to Egypt would be nice!