Building a stronger Qantas

[simonpenny408]

How must LAN feel. They operate their only flight connecting Sydney to South America and suddenly Qantas pulls out of BUE and of ALL the cities in South America they could have chose (Rio, San Paolo anyone) they choose to operate into SCL in direct competition with their One World partner LAN Chile.

I would image there are a few very pi$$ed off people at LAN

Just sayin'

 

[nlagalle]

How must LAN feel. They operate their only flight connecting Sydney to South America and suddenly Qantas pulls out of BUE and of ALL the cities in South America they could have chose (Rio, San Paolo anyone) they choose to operate into SCL in direct competition with their One World partner LAN Chile.

I would image there are a few very pi$$ed off people at LAN

Just sayin'

I'd say they are probably quite happy as that is their hub! So it works well for LAN for connecting flights.

 

[simonpenny408]

Note that I have NOT checked aircraft flying range and whether any other cities would actually be doable. But LAN must be thinking "bugger off back to BUE" at some level

 

[nlagalle]

Note that I have NOT checked aircraft flying range and whether any other cities would actually be doable. But LAN must be thinking "bugger off back to BUE" at some level

Why would they think that if they are being fed more traffic?

 

[goldy]

Note that I have NOT checked aircraft flying range and whether any other cities would actually be doable. But LAN must be thinking "bugger off back to BUE" at some level

It might be wise to check such relevant facts before making unrealistic or impossible suggestions......

and a few further points... Buenos Aires is EZE and not BUE, San Paolo is Sao Paulo and the reason that QF have Cancelled EZE and redirected traffic to SCL is that EZE was effectively an O&D service with very limited or no connectivity whereas SCL is a LAN hub that enables travellers to basically get anywhere in South America. This can only be a good thing, especially if they seek a JV on the route.

 

[simonpenny408]

Direct competition on what they may consider to be one of their premium routes and a non-stop flight as well

I take the point that it may feed more traffic into their hub but it probably means LAN800/801 load factors would be hit and I could see them terminating that at AKL instead

 

[willzzz88]

Simonperry408, GRU and GIG and simply too far for Qantas's current fleet of aircraft.

They would need a 787 (range but +1 hour diversion due to ETOPS) / A340 -E/HGW preferably (4-engines) / 77L/77W (range but +1 hour diversion due to ETOPS) in order for it to make it non-stop.

SCL solves these issues for QF:
1. SYD-SCL can be run with a normal 744 freeing up 744ER scheduling resources and only putting a 744ER on the route if the load factor is very high + maximum freight capacity in transit from Asia.
2. SCL on-ward connections. Although EZE is 1 hour closer to GRU/GIG than SCL the flying time difference is <1.25 hours. Also TAM is in *A and they were using them for the EZE-GRU/GIG connections and not truly oneWorld (who knows about this LATAM merger, I don't know what will happen).
3. It doesn't require a dedicated 744ER. The SYD-EZE route was literally was putting the range of the 744ER to the limit until SYD-DFW came along. Now that SYD-DFW-BNE-SYD route is being run they need the 744ER's on that route as a priority.
4. SCL potentially has higher yield than EZE due to the mining business from Aus.
5. SCL is a *VERY EFFICIENT* airport for airside transit, allowing <60 minutes intl-to-intl and similar for domestic with-in Chile.

Also the *REASON* LAN stops in AKL is for the CX connection (AKL is a very efficient air-side transit airport) from Latin/South America to Asia and also the maximise freight yields (the max they can carry on SCL-AKL).

QF with the 744 can carry more freight to SCL into LAN's hub in South America.

Finally the relationship is 2-way and win-win. LAN uses QF and CX for Asia connections from AKL and SYD and the reverse from Asia to Latin/South America via AKL and SYD.

 

[markis10]

How must LAN feel. They operate their only flight connecting Sydney to South America and suddenly Qantas pulls out of BUE and of ALL the cities in South America they could have chose (Rio, San Paolo anyone) they choose to operate into SCL in direct competition with their One World partner LAN Chile.

I would image there are a few very pi$$ed off people at LAN

Just sayin'

I would say they are happy, would not be surprised if they cull the SYD flights.

 

[simonpenny408]

OK, OK - those are all good points (and I apologise for screwing up my airport codes and not being able to correctly type the name of major Brazilian cities). I now have no doubt that the route makes sense for QF (but in fact I never doubted that - my original post did not mention that at all). I was just trying to see things from a LAN perspective.

The hub traffic is a good thing for them. I admit. Even though it may cannibalise their own traffic (remains to be seen)

Maybe I'll just go back to bed now

 

[willzzz88]

I bet the SYD-SCL was done in relationship with LAN and CX to a point.

LAN and CX SWAP passengers EVERYDAY currently in AKL between East Asia (HKG) and South America (SCL) right now.

QF wants to swap passengers ONE STOP like LA/CX with LA/QF SCL-SYD-SIN/HKG/BKK/PVG/NRT/You get my point.

LAN has a essentially a daily 2 hour shuttle between SCL and EZE/AEP right now.

They also have essentially a daily 3.5/4 hour shuttle between SCL and GRU/GIG right now and they fly to EVERY airport in South America that is worth economically doing so (including SCL-BOG/UIO/CCS/You get my point).

One of the frequencies of SCL-GRU is SPECIFICALLY run with a 77W (777-300ER) on TAM right now in-between their intercontinental long-haul flights (the flight 2 hours after arrival from LA800 from SYD and AKL!) in order to carry connecting traffic to GRU.

 

[markis10]

SYD-SCL is only getting 5K per month traffic, which is the same as EZE despite being more frequent, hardly a huge demand for either service but that may change as its consolidated.

 

[simongr]

Yep, The Swire Group owns/runs those airlines, but not sure that changing Qantas's name to something totally unrelated has any point to it. The Swire Group I think has fingers in many pies, whereas Qantas is just airlines (or so I believe).

Swire Group is a privately owned company based out of the UK. In Australia it owns farms (NSW), three logistics businesses and a shipping business. I think the investment in CX is owned by the Australian business but I don't think teh Australian based management team have active involvement in running CX.

 

[markis10]

Swire Group is a privately owned company based out of the UK. In Australia it owns farms (NSW), three logistics businesses and a shipping business. I think the investment in CX is owned by the Australian business but I don't think teh Australian based management team have active involvement in running CX.

Swire only own 43.97%:



Major Shareholders
Swire Pacific Limited
43.97%
CITIC Pacific Limited
1.98%
Air China Limited
29.99%

 

[simongr]

Which is why I think the comment above about "hint hint what is the name of the company that owns CX - it isnt CX" is misleading as I think CX is a listed company with shares available for trade.

 

[QF WP]

This thread could be as popular as the Amex thread if we keep this up....

 

[Archphoto]

Swire Group is a privately owned company based out of the UK. In Australia it owns farms (NSW), three logistics businesses and a shipping business. I think the investment in CX is owned by the Australian business but I don't think teh Australian based management team have active involvement in running CX.

They also have their fingers in hotels with their own brand: Swire Hotels. Some of these are actually pretty slick: The Upper House is amazing!

Luxury Hotels in Hong Kong, Mainland China & UK | Swire Hotels

 

[wandering_fred]

I think this new entity is nothing more than a blatant attempt to circumvent the Qantas sale Act.

+1, though I will acknowledge that QF needs a transfer hub in SE Asia. It remains to be seen where.

The unintended consequences that QF may be ignoring is the level of One World partnership flying. Getting too greedy and trying to keep everything in the QF FF program may reduce the number of premium passengers willing/wanting to fly QF (and its non OW subsidiaries)

Fred

 

[Canny man]

A bit of competition on the SCL route would be welcome. LAN absolutely gouge on the J fares - I've never seen less than $10k return.

 

[Red Roo]

That would be nice - seeing as how they are only flying SYD-SIN-LHR now; could start flying direct to BKK and HKG from other cities instead and make those shorter hops sooooo much less taxing!

Would love a direct ADL-BKK, just like the ADL-SIN route we have now.

What do you say Red Roo?

I pass lots of good ideas from AFF onto various teams here so I will ensure to include this one as well.
I know a lot of people who would prefer not to fly through Sydney.

Cheers,
Red Roo

 

[TonyHancock]

I pass lots of good ideas from AFF onto various teams here so I will ensure to include this one as well.
I know a lot of people who would prefer not to fly through Sydney.

Cheers,
Red Roo

I think everything should be routed through MEL.