Qatar Airways to acquire 25% of Virgin Australia

[RooFlyer]

I have no doubts for the PER-JNB route, however QF were already planning on launching this even before SA ceased flying it the first time, so it’s not unlikely. Now VA has vacated the field I actually think it’s more likely QF and SA will sign an agreement, although QF’s recent deal with 4Z throws a spanner in the works.

The JNB routes are comparable to SCL routes, and ACCC continues to authorise codeshares between QF and LA, so it’s not out of the question (and was in place some years ago)

All fair enough.

 

[SCM]

I will address this point generally - having more QR flights is good, but it doesn't need to come at the cost of VAFF exclusivity on the way to EMEA! These things are NOT mutually exclusive!

SQ flies to Australia far far more than QR was even proposing earlier. Did they insist on being the only VA Partner flying to EMEA? No!

QR requested extra flights to Australia earlier this year before any such talk of this agreement. Did they need exclusivity with VA heading to EMEA? No!

It's completely unnecessary! So what should happen? Everything in this submission but not the clause restricting VA from partnering with SQ and EY (or anyone else for that matter in the future) from providing redemption, lounges and anything else to Europe/Middle-East/Africa !

How is that not obvious?

The clause basically restricts VAFFs to choose QR and even worse VA codeshares which won't be subject to the occasional 5% discount or whatnot that QR does. It means we won't be able to utilise SQ and EY flights to EMEA. Why? What's the benefit for us? None!

Do you think QR won't fly more to Australia if this is not allowed? No! They already wanted to fly more earlier this year !!! VA if anything is doing them a favour by allowing the wet-lease! It's already a win-win!

How is that not obvious?

---

So, potentially opening up a dozen or more wide-body flights to DOH (connecting onto Europe) as VA flights stifles competition for VA customers? They can still fly EY etc if they like, just won't get their precious VA status perks. Very reasonable for VA to say to customers - you want your VA status perks? Fly VA, now we have our own flights.

My point is they can open up those dozen flights, without exclusivity.... that would be the best of both worlds. Qatar wanted to fly more to Australia anyway - they got rejected, that was before any talk of exclusivity with VA.

It is bad for VA customers because they have less choice, they have to go with more expensive QR flights and they don't get as many lounge benefits, they get less choice - that's by definition worse.

Yes, I'm going to submit - saying that its a bloody good idea. More flights on all or any carriers, the better.

These concepts are not mutually exclusive - I also said I support most of the submission, just not the exclusivity clause. I don't know why you are confused to think you can't have one without the other.

As far as I am aware, VA doesn’t coordinate pricing or schedules with EY or SQ, so I’m not sure what your point is. Nothing from a competition perspective is being taken away, so I don’t see how it is stifling competition in any way. It’s only improving it.

Is it not obvious? Right now you can fly EY or SQ or QR and get the same number of SCs, so you go for the cheaper option all else being equal, and EY and SQ are generally much cheaper than QR - in fact just having the 3 of them being VA partners, means they have to each compete on their own accord for all VA frequent flyers - on pricing and other benefits.

If EY giving VA plats F lounge access because VA chooses to pay them extra? Hell no! It's because they want to appeal to those higher tier flyers spending the most...

 

[simmomelb]

So riddle me this - why did QR partner with VA?

Of course it makes a huge difference having access to one of the two FF ecosystems. You’re kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

I am not deluding myself. As I previously mentioned, I do not anticipate that the ACCC will give significant weight to the loyalty program in its decision-making process. My comments are not a reflection of personal preference, but rather an analysis of the situation.

I believe the ACCC will primarily focus on the increase in available flights as a form of added competition in the market, which is likely to have a positive outcome for consumers.

The final determination will shed more light on this with their imminent announcement.

Clearly, I would prefer the Etihad & Singapore partnership to be business as usual, but this is not important to what I am referring to.

 

[HS-TQE]

I am not deluding myself. As I previously mentioned, I do not anticipate that the ACCC will give significant weight to the loyalty program in its decision-making process. My comments are not a reflection of personal preference, but rather an analysis of the situation.

I believe the ACCC will primarily focus on the increase in available flights as a form of added competition in the market, which is likely to have a positive outcome for consumers.

I'd suspect that the ACCC will only give weight to the Loyalty concerns and the pending 'entire' removals of EY, SA and VS if either one, all or the other partner that's still partly affected (SQ) had put in a submission outlining those concerns.

That said, the chances of either of the four airlines (regardless of whether it's just one, a few, or all four) submitting a submission outlining concerns and/or opposing the partnership directly would be very little (if any) at best.

In the past, there would've been chances of SQ typing up and submitting a strong opposing submission to the ACCC in scenarios such as this, but with SQ choosing to increase regional services instead of relying on VA, the chances of SQ putting in an opposing submission would be very, very slim at best.

 

[oz_mark]

I am not deluding myself. As I previously mentioned, I do not anticipate that the ACCC will give significant weight to the loyalty program in its decision-making process. My comments are not a reflection of personal preference, but rather an analysis of the situation.

Some of the submissions touch on the issue of how it affects Velocity members, in particular the exculsive interline/partner bit, so they will likely have to give some thought to it.

Virgin Australia and Qatar Airways

Virgin Australia and Qatar Airways (the Applicants) seek authorisation to engage in cooperative conduct under an integrated alliance including:

www.accc.gov.au

 

[simmomelb]

Some of the submissions touch on the issue of how it affects Velocity members, in particular the exculsive interline/partner bit, so they will likely have to give some thought to it.

Virgin Australia and Qatar Airways

Virgin Australia and Qatar Airways (the Applicants) seek authorisation to engage in cooperative conduct under an integrated alliance including:

www.accc.gov.au

Oh yeah, of course, I think it will play a small part in it, but not a major factor, that's all I am saying

 

[RooFlyer]

Some of the submissions touch on the issue of how it affects Velocity members, in particular the exculsive interline/partner bit, so they will likely have to give some thought to it.

Virgin Australia and Qatar Airways

Virgin Australia and Qatar Airways (the Applicants) seek authorisation to engage in cooperative conduct under an integrated alliance including:

www.accc.gov.au

Was just browsing some of the private submissions. Many of the objections sound vary familiar

 

[Saab34]

Nice work gents.

 

[kpc]

Some interesting commentary here:

Big changes coming to Virgin’s Singapore Airlines partnership

The impending shake-up will be a blow to frequent flyers.

www.executivetraveller.com

I'm happy this won't change.

However, the ability to convert Virgin Australia Velocity Points to Singapore Airlines KrisFlyer miles would not be impacted by the redefined relationship

 

[HS-TQE]

I'm happy this won't change.

"However, the ability to convert Virgin Australia Velocity Points to Singapore Airlines KrisFlyer miles would not be impacted by the redefined relationship"

At least for now whilst the pending 25% acquisition is currently under ACCC assessment.

 

[jakeseven7]

Some interesting commentary here:

Big changes coming to Virgin’s Singapore Airlines partnership

The impending shake-up will be a blow to frequent flyers.

www.executivetraveller.com

I'm happy this won't change.

Tick tock…

 

[HS-TQE]

To think when VA 2.0 emerged from administration, I personally would've tipped that Bain could have ended the Krisflyer/Velocity for $$ reasons, but fast forward to a few years later, and it seems that it may be their 'pending' overlords Qatar Airways that could end the Velocity/Krisflyer transfer in favour of a potential Velocity/Avios transfer facility instead!

 

[jase05]

Tick tock…

Yeah, not fussed personally as I’ve rarely used it but can see how some will be upset if it disappears

 

[HS-TQE]

I would assume there would be sufficient notice if the Velocity/Krisflyer program was to be phased out by the pending "overlords", but knowing Virgin IT I'd suspect there may be crashes like there was with the final days of VA 1.0.

 

[p--and--t]

I would assume there would be sufficient notice if the Velocity/Krisflyer program was to be phased out by the pending "overlords", but knowing Virgin IT I'd suspect there may be crashes like there was with the final days of VA 1.0.

Maybe they might eventually get around to 2FA like a grown up system.

 

[justinbrett]

Qantas has made a submission against the proposed conduct due to the wet lease (but supports QR investment generally)

Loading…

www.accc.gov.au

Many of the airports have made submissions and they’re not keen on the exclusive partnership (but support it otherwise).

VA and QR will have to address these issues even though some AFFers think it’s a non issue.

 

[RooFlyer]

Loading…

www.accc.gov.au

Qantas complains:
"... they can be used to side-step domestic laws and regulation."

Good 'ol Qantas - the protector of Australian crew jobs.

 

[eastwest101]

Qantas goes bolshie and is now the champion of pilots and crew pay and working conditions! Thats news to me.

As already raised in public statements by various union officials1, the proposed wet lease enables Virgin
Australia to schedule services crewed entirely with Qatari pilots and crew, whose pay and conditions are
substantially less than Australian-based crew.

 

[HS-TQE]

I'd suspect the decision on the partnership/wetlease is going to be delayed based on wet leasing staff issues rather than the VFF partnerships, QF and various unnamed staff in their submissions highlight an indefinite date with no plan of transition to Australian crew.

This could possibly end like the infamous Regional/Indonesia capacity application earlier in the year.

 

[RooFlyer]

QF and various unnamed staff in their submissions highlight an indefinite date with no plan of transition to Australian crew.

Qantas, of course operate foreign crew on numerous of its flights - permanently. Hypocrisy much?

Wonder if Aston can add a chapter.