Qantas / Emirates tie up (Partnership inc. Codeshare, Status)

[Aussie_flyer]

sorry , I just fell asleep. Enough figures and statistics already

 

[ajw373]

Total arrivals from Singapore into Australia 278000 in the year ended June 2012, SA share 12000 or 4.3%. Thats data sourced from the inbound arrivals card, I think boat arrivals from SIN fit into the statistic sample lower than error rate category Visitors from the UK for the year ended June are 337000 of which 54000 came in via SA representing just under 16% of the SA total.

National totals of UK visitors represent 10% of all visitors, yet SA attracts 16%, national totals for Singaporeans account 5.3% of all visitors while SA only accounts for 4%. SA is lifting above its weight for UK arrivals, below its weight for Singaporean on a percentage share basis.

Actually no, have a look at the data you have posted.

Firstly with Singaporians it shows vistors to SA, not people on flights SIN-ADL, massive difference I am afraid and the source was not arrivals cards but a tourism survey (quite clearly shown in the screen grab).

As for UK same story shows total vistors to SA not those on flights ADL-SIN, no source of data.

So my point remains those stats do not show the percentage of people on ADL-SIN flights that are staying/orginating in Singapore and those going to destinations beyond, in particular the UK.

 

[ajw373]

sorry , I just fell asleep. Enough figures and statistics already

Especially ones that have nothing to do with the subject at hand!

 

[markis10]

Actually no, have a look at the data you have posted.

Firstly with Singaporians it shows vistors to SA, not people on flights SIN-ADL, massive difference I am afraid and the source was not arrivals cards but a tourism survey (quite clearly shown in the screen grab).

As for UK same story shows total vistors to SA not those on flights ADL-SIN, no source of data.

So my point remains those stats do not show the percentage of people on ADL-SIN flights that are staying/orginating in Singapore and those going to destinations beyond, in particular the UK.

I was referring to the totals into the country, as based on the ABS stats published which are sourced from arrivals cards, its very much valid data, its the same source for SAs figures which being published by a government department (http://tourism.sa.gov.au/assets/documents/uk-market-profile.pdf), have credence.

Given both Tourism SA and the quote from Qantas support the assertion that QF81/82 had large through traffic, I go with the stats as published which are authoritative enough for me to say that yes, Qantas has handed over a route to EK The upcoming EK traffic stats ex SA will bear that up in what could be a more authoritative manner for you in the next few months.

 

[Fruitcake]

...Qantas has handed over a route to EK

Of course what we'll never know publicly is, given the revenue sharing aspects of the alliance, whether Qantas really cares that they've handed the route to EK.

 

[markis10]

Of course what we'll never know publicly is, given the revenue sharing aspects of the alliance, whether Qantas really cares that they've handed the route to EK.

Million dollar question, there is no doubt in my mind they have handed routes to EK, but the opportunity lost versus revenue gained is the real issue. FWIW the press on the EK/QF tour were pursuing the execs about this arrangement, I got the feeling Steve Creedy had a good idea and that the figures were not even , not surprising when negotiating from a position of strength re costs and capital versus one of weakness.

 

[ajw373]

I was referring to the totals into the country, as based on the ABS stats published which are sourced from arrivals cards, its very much valid data, its the same source for SAs figures which being published by a government department (http://tourism.sa.gov.au/assets/documents/uk-market-profile.pdf), have credence.

Really then why post this:

View attachment 16410

Which shows the total number of Singaporians that visit SA on their trip, which as it clearly shows comes from a survey not the stats you are now claiming.

Or this one which is showing the total number of English people that visited SA.

View attachment 16411

What is in question is how many of the people stayed or orginated in Singapore and how many went onwards to/from Europe on Qantas flights? These stats don't show this now do THESE stats show what you are now saying. Not doubting these new claims, but what your quoting doesn't marry up with what you are claiming.

Given both Tourism SA and the quote from Qantas support the assertion that QF81/82 had large through traffic, I go with the stats as published which are authoritative enough for me to say that yes, Qantas has handed over a route to EK The upcoming EK traffic stats ex SA will bear that up in what could be a more authoritative manner for you in the next few months.

I have no doubt it had large through traffic, again the question is how much of that traffic was going onto the 3 Qantas flights to Europe? No stat that you have provided gives this answer.

Yet again you have provided meaningless statistics to justify your argument, then accuse me of burying my head in the sand. Now don't get me wrong I don't actually disbelieve that Qantas has handed these passengers over to Emirates, though in the grand scheme of things is it really that much to be too worried about. (of course this is coming from someone who lives in a city that needs to transit elsewhere to get to Europe and someone who is not happy with the retimed flights through Dubai or the use of Dubai)

 

[ajw373]

Million dollar question, there is no doubt in my mind they have handed routes to EK, but the opportunity lost versus revenue gained is the real issue.

Actually no the question in relation to revenue is what is making more/loosing less Qantas money, flying these routes (especially Adelaide which wasn't 7 days a week) or redeploying the a/c (even if it is by allowing older a/c to be retired) elsewhere? At the end of the day it is a private company, it stopped becoming a government owned business years and years ago, so it needs to use it's a/c where it best feels it can make them earn their keep.

 

[docjames]

The billion dollar question is whether the revenue earnt vs cost expended by putting pax on EK (QF code) is a better ROI than the revenue earnt vs cost expended operating their own aircraft.

Given the repeatedly stated "losses" they obviously feel at worst QF will lose less by on-selling EK seats than running their own.

I see this a short term way of improving QFi's financial position so other routes in the long term can potentially be expanded when capital and/or available aircraft allow.

Love or loathe AJ, he's a businessman, and will do what is best for the ROI of QF. To truly do otherwise to a publicly listed company (as some like to suggest) would leave him open to potential prosecution I'd have thought.

Only he (and the board and exec) really know what the financials are, and what the "long game" is.

 

[legroom]

"Qantas was plum for us"

Reading this article with quotes attributed to Barry Brown, EK chief in Australasia, further convinced me that EK thinks it is getting the better deal out of QF.

He specifically mentioned the benefits of "domestic feed" and "corporate clientele" from a Qantas partnership.

EK share of the market is steadily rising while that of QF is slowly declining and Brown has now been promoted - obviously for successfully running the local operations.

I doubt that the partnership is a win-win outcome, more like a win - lose one in the long term with EK slowly cannibalising QF's clients with offers of cheaper fares and a seamless transfer onward to Europe.


Disclaimer:

I am not in the aviation industry, nor a statistician - just an average traveller. I am sure AJ would have reams of reports from high-priced MBA-qualified consultants justifying his every move, so my thinking may just belong to the realm of pub talk.

 

[BD1959]

Re: "Qantas was plum for us"

Disclaimer:

I am not in the aviation industry, nor a statistician - just an average traveller. I am sure AJ would have reams of reports from high-priced MBA-qualified consultants justifying his every move, so my thinking may just belong to the realm of pub talk.

Pub talk works for me!!

Regards,

BD

 

[dot]

Re: "Qantas was plum for us"

Anecdotally, from talking to colleagues who live in Dubai, they say that flights into Europe are much harder to get on since the partnership took effect. Routes to BCN, NCE and FCO were mentioned specifically. Not sure if EK are seeing the same on all their EU flights or just some destinations.

 

[ajw373]

Re: "Qantas was plum for us"

Reading this article with quoted attributed to Barry Brown, EK chief in Australasia, further convinced me that EK thinks it is getting the better deal out of QF.

Guess it depends upon how you look at it. Maybe QF are getting the better deal because EK have decided to work with them rather than destroy them.

 

[Timba-Jet]

Re: "Qantas was plum for us"

Guess it depends upon how you look at it. Maybe QF are getting the better deal because EK have decided to work with them rather than destroy them.

Looking in the positive, glass half full!

But now, likely CX, SQ, BA, maybe even MH will direct or inadvertently destroy QF ops into Asia. Oh that's glass half empty view, oops.

 

[zachary.august]

Re: "Qantas was plum for us"

From my perspective, I see the next few years a period of growth for Qantas and this growth will mean an international expansion.

I personally think that we will see QF operate PER-DXB-BER-DXB-PER services with their A330 aircraft due to German Government hostility toward EK, connecting with AB to open up more non-EK served destinations and the fact that they'll have an all new J class onboard. I also think you'll see a reinstatement of SYD-PEK-SYD services with A330s and once the 787s arrive BNE-DXB-BNE and DXB-FRA-DXB services.

 

[JessicaTam]

From my perspective, I see the next few years a period of growth for Qantas and this growth will mean an international expansion.

I personally think that we will see QF operate PER-DXB-BER-DXB-PER services with their A330 aircraft due to German Government hostility toward EK, connecting with AB to open up more non-EK served destinations and the fact that they'll have an all new J class onboard. I also think you'll see a reinstatement of SYD-PEK-SYD services with A330s and once the 787s arrive BNE-DXB-BNE and DXB-FRA-DXB services.

I hope you are right, but I think QFi will bunker down for a while until it can see the long term effects of the EK tie up.

 

[browski]

Re: "Qantas was plum for us"

From my perspective, I see the next few years a period of growth for Qantas and this growth will mean an international expansion.

I personally think that we will see QF operate PER-DXB-BER-DXB-PER services with their A330 aircraft due to German Government hostility toward EK, connecting with AB to open up more non-EK served destinations and the fact that they'll have an all new J class onboard. I also think you'll see a reinstatement of SYD-PEK-SYD services with A330s and once the 787s arrive BNE-DXB-BNE and DXB-FRA-DXB services.

From any perspective, none of this will ever happen.

 

[zachary.august]

Re: "Qantas was plum for us"

From any perspective, none of this will ever happen.

Why do you say that?

 

[browski]

Re: "Qantas was plum for us"

Why do you say that?

For the last 6 years QFi have been on a mission to decrease both aircraft and routes. There has not been one new route in the last 6 years where there has not been a cessation of a similar route. There has only been the net reduction of routes.
eg. SYD- Buenos Aires to SYD-Santiago
SYD-SFO to SYD-DFW. etc

In addition
SYD-BOM gone, SIN-BOM gone, SYD-PEK gone. ADL-SIN gone, SIN-FRA gone, PER-HKG gone. Rome gone.

Now the Qantas group airline Jetstar may well increase routes; particularly SIN-DXB and SIN-BOM, but QFi will not.

The QFi routes SYD-MNL and SYD-CGK must be only hanging by a thread.

 

[ComeFlyWithMe]

Re: "Qantas was plum for us"

Now the Qantas group airline Jetstar may well increase routes; particularly SIN-DXB and SIN-BOM, but QFi will not.

The QFi routes SYD-MNL and SYD-CGK must be only hanging by a thread.

Agreed, I'd also add SYD-HNL which they still embarrassingly operate with a 767.

QF has so much legacy they just can't shake. It's a high cost business. If FWA would allow it, they'd just sack all the staff and start again, and to be honest that would make them a competitive global airline again.