Qatar applies for extra rights (take two)

[Saab34]

I think you will find they will replace any new one frequency granted with that cash burning ADL stopover flight, so essentially they won’t be growing as such. However I wouldn’t expect them to replace that flight unless they got 2 frequencies per day.

If you have a look at past QR applications over the last decade, they always apply for a larger amount initially, and have only really ever been approved for 20-50% of what they asked for.

The Government will cop a media belting if they approve anything here or not, so perhaps we might not see any movement until after the election.

I still would like to see EY increase its schedule to double daily and bring the A350.

 

[jase05]

And from Perth, QF is also one stop from PER to many airports in the UK and Europe. Why are you suggesting that that’s not the case? Not sure what your point is.

As the poster suggested with EK and QR it’s one stop on the same airline in quality aircraft to many Euro ports. With QF it’s one stop but the second leg is on a junk Euro flight and most likely on QR’s sister BA

 

[RooFlyer]

I know that @RSVKanga will be absolutely delighted. Because of his/her continuing repetition of how bad QR is I decided we have to find out how bad/good it really is. So last night i booked our first QR flight. I won't be able to experience their Q suites as we will be in the F cabin.

Meh. Shoulda booked business. You'll think its First (comparatively)

 

[RooFlyer]

QF may be forced to cut its international services from Perth as it is already clear that Qatar is capacity dumping into Perth (why else are they using the A380 then?) and allowing them to fly even more seats into Perth will only inflame the unprecedented capacity dumping which will make their seats cheaper at the expense of QF flights. That’ll lead to many job losses for QF in the west, east and across the whole country. It’s not just Perth, obviously. There is a big, big difference between competition and large-scale capacity dumping paid for by unlimited oil cash funds.

Hang on. Wasn’t your argument just a day or two ago that Qantas was going to crush the M3 with superior services including the direct ones to Europe? And you wouldn’t entertain my argument that if nothing else Qatar might reduce prices to maintain its market share.

Now it’s “we’re all gonna be ’rooned’ , Qantas can’t compete” . Too bad.

If Qantas can’t compete then it should simply withdraw and/or go out of business. Other Airlines will fill the void and they’ll all need people to service their aircraft and be at the airport just like now.

Bottom line is the public interest supersedes a corporate one. I don’t see BHP getting favourable treatment over say Rio in the mining sector even though it’s the ‘national mining icon’, or any other leading brand. Is a risible, intellectually shallow argument.

 

[RSVKanga]

Hang on. Wasn’t your argument just a day or two ago that Qantas was going to crush the M3 with superior services including the direct ones to Europe? And you wouldn’t entertain my argument that if nothing else Qatar might reduce prices to maintain its market share.

Now it’s “we’re all gonna be ’rooned’ , Qantas can’t compete” . Too bad.

If Qantas can’t compete then it should simply withdraw and/or go out of business. Other Airlines will fill the void and they’ll all need people to service their aircraft and be at the airport just like now.

Bottom line is the public interest supersedes a corporate one. I don’t see BHP getting favourable treatment over say Rio in the mining sector even though it’s the ‘national mining icon’, or any other leading brand. Is a risible, intellectually shallow argument.

A national icon designated by the Commonwealth Government as the flag carrier of Australia is completely different to a mining firm. Countries, and ideally their citizens, take pride in their national airline.

If Qantas can’t compete then it should simply withdraw and/or go out of business. Other Airlines will fill the void and they’ll all need people to service their aircraft and be at the airport just like now.

So Australia shouldn’t have a national carrier, it should be all foreign airlines operating international and only foreign-owned airlines flying domestic?

I condemn the despicable and un-Australian view that you hold and have expressed on the this forum.

I get that as an Avios/Velocity FF in Australia, you will lose out by less QR flights, but sometimes, Australia’s national interest, economic sovereignty and prosperity is more important than the individual Avios points balances of disgruntled citizens.

Hang on. Wasn’t your argument just a day or two ago that Qantas was going to crush the M3 with superior services including the direct ones to Europe?

Yes, once project sunrise starts. It’s still two years from now and QR will deploy the unprecedented capacity dumping the second the application is approved; very harmful to our Australian-owned airline that has an Australian workforce.

 

[jase05]

and ideally their citizens, take pride in their national airline.

Many Australians including their staff feel only shame not pride

 

[OATEK]

A national icon designated by the Commonwealth Government as the flag carrier of Australia is completely different to a mining firm. Countries, and ideally their citizens, take pride in their national airline.



So Australia shouldn’t have a national carrier, it should be all foreign airlines operating international and only foreign-owned airlines flying domestic?

I condemn the despicable and un-Australian view that you hold and have expressed on the this forum.

I get that as an Avios/Velocity FF in Australia, you will lose out by less QR flights, but sometimes, Australia’s national interest, economic sovereignty and prosperity is more important than the individual Avios points balances of disgruntled citizens.


Yes, once project sunrise starts. It’s still two years from now and QR will deploy the unprecedented capacity dumping the second the application is approved; very harmful to our Australian-owned airline that has an Australian workforce.

What is that old saying about national icons (or similar) and feet of clay? Sacking baggage handlers, trying to move FAs to contracts (look out here comes the FWC), being more focussed on side issues than running the airline, put together with lots of other dodgy activities does suggest those clay feet a well and truly showing.

However, for QR to get past the roadblock from the Government I suspect they will have to do a lot more than just sell the value of additional flights. Unfortunately none of us really know what it will take for the Govt to give QR a few extra slots into the big four.

 

[Daver6]

It's really disappointing that any thread these days around QF or QR is completely derailed by total drivel from one certain poster. Gone are the days when there was sensible discussion worth actually reading.

Yes, I know I can block that poster, but that doesn't enhance the quality of the conversation in the thread.

</whinge>

 

[Mwenenzi]

I’m not sure if the max 10 people employed by airports because of this will offset the thousands of Australian workers at QF who could lose their jobs if QR gets these 28 additional weekly flights approved and starts to impact QF operations.

Are you saying 10 AU workers (for QR) will do the same work output as 1000's of QF workers? QF operates with a lot of out source/contractors, as do other airlines in AU.
I doubt if the majority of the Australian workers who clean and load/unload bags for QF (and all other airlines) aircraft are AU citizens.

 

[dajop]

Always find these sovereign interest arguments amusing.

If we want to start somewhere there is a heap of critical infrastructure- both public and private - that is either foreign owned, foreign operated or foreign sourced - whether it be transport (such as Melbourne trains), electricity, telecommunications, or even the computing infrastructure that powers our banks and telcos .

And we’re worried about 1 of what 50 foreign carriers serving Australia eroding the sovereign interest? TBH, I’d start elsewhere.

 

[RSVKanga]

It's really well-overdue that any thread these days around QF or QR now has alternative opinions and perspective (that the government agreed with last year) from one certain poster. Gone are the days when there was just a collective conclusion from AFF that QR deserves extra rights and/or QF is bad, without anyone offering a challenging viewpoint worth actually reading.

FTFY.

And we’re worried about 1 of what 50 foreign carriers serving Australia eroding the sovereign interest? TBH, I’d start elsewhere.

Of course I’m only talking about QR. They have access to those unlimited oil funds that erode the principles of supply and demand and profit and loss. They can fly almost completely empty planes on revenue services and offset the loss by those oil funds. A good example is that Adelaide-Melbourne empty QR flight. Imagine what they will do with more capacity. There needs to be a consistent maintenance of the level playing field. This doesn’t apply to other QF competitors like SQ and UA who are in the same boat as QF in not having access to this unlimited oil funding.

 

[jase05]

FTFY.





Of course I’m only talking about QR. They have access to those unlimited oil funds that erode the principles of supply and demand and profit and loss. They can fly almost completely empty planes on revenue services and offset the loss by those oil funds. A good example is that Adelaide-Melbourne empty QR flight. Imagine what they will do with more capacity. There needs to be a consistent maintenance of the level playing field. This doesn’t apply to other QF competitors like SQ and UA who are in the same boat as QF in not having access to this unlimited oil funding.

But EK doesn’t have unlimited funds or is that ok because they are buddies with QF?
At the end of the day you have a hatred for QR because they aren’t playing nicely with QF and I’d bet if they suddenly became friends again you wouldn’t have any issue with them

 

[Himeno]

The reality is its a massive headache for the Gov't who will need to give an clear unquestionable explanation for rejection QR a second time especially after granting 21 flights to Turkish Airlines.

That was the first increase in the air service agreement limit with Turkey since the current agreement was signed in 2010.
Qatar got an increase in 2022 (and had gotten an increase every 2 years prior).

I could see an increase of another 7 weekly flights to the major ports, and maybe another 7 with the to/via regional rules (which they currently for the DOH-MEL-ADL).

 

[drron]

A national icon designated by the Commonwealth Government as the flag carrier of Australia is completely different to a mining firm. Countries, and ideally their citizens, take pride in their national airline.
So Australia shouldn’t have a national carrier, it should be all foreign airlines operating international and only foreign-owned airlines flying domestic?

I condemn the despicable and un-Australian view that you hold and have expressed on the this forum.

First you really don't know your history. Qantas was designated Australia's flag carrier in 1947 when the Commonwealth Government bought the company. Surely it disappeared when Qantas was sold by the government in 1993.
second it is not our National carrier. Surely if it was it would help repatriate Australians in times of natural disasters such as getting Australians back home who were stuck overseas with the Covid pandemic. but what happened. Those nasty foreigners brought 87.5% of OS arrivals to Australia from March 2020 to the end of August 2021,

• Foreign airlines transported 87.5% of the total passengers to and from Australia during the pandemic, while Australia-based airlines carried 12.5%.
• International airlines operated 10,000 capped commercial passenger flights into major Australian airports, serving over 300,000 arriving passengers.

Between Apr-2020 and Aug-2021 (the latest month for which international arrivals data is available from BITRE), some 1.52 million passengers were transported in and out of Australia, including 618,401 inbound passengers and 902,345 outbound.
Of the total, foreign carriers transported 1.33 million passengers - or 87.5% of the total, while Australia-based airlines carried 190,589 passengers, or 12.5% of the total.
The tally was bolstered for Australia and New Zealand-based carriers by the (short-lived) open border arrangement between Australia and Zealand in 2021

And that's not all. The foreign airlines ensured freight during those months was 80% of normal rates allowing vital supplies to be delivered during the pandemic.

Airlines maintained overall air freight tonnage to about 80% pre-pandemic levels at some 77,000 tonnes on average per month, according to BARA. This air freight facilitated vital supplies of medical and personal protective equipment, especially in the early days of the pandemic and the online purchasing boom as the pandemic continued.

How foreign airlines have kept Australia open through the pandemic

Foreign airlines have played a crucial role in transporting the majority of passengers to and from Australia during the pandemic, with 87.5% of total passengers being carried by international carriers. These airlines have operated under challenging conditions, often with uneconomic loads, to...

centreforaviation.com

So I condemn you for your totally undemocratic views in not allowing Australian citizens to have the choice of airlines that they desire.
I also feel that your incessant criticism of QR an airline that really stepped up to the plate during the pandemic unlike QF is repugnant to fair minded Australians.

 

[justinbrett]

But EK doesn’t have unlimited funds or is that ok because they are buddies with QF?
At the end of the day you have a hatred for QR because they aren’t playing nicely with QF and I’d bet if they suddenly became friends again you wouldn’t have any issue with them

EK doesn't actually have unlimited funds. EY does. Not EK.

Dubai is not far off running out of oil. There's a reason why the Burj Dubai was renamed Burj Khalifa - the project had to be bailed out by Abu Dhabi (Khalifa is the Emir). That's why Dubai heavily invested in tourism and EK to keep it going after the oil money runs out. However I'm pretty sure EK is running at a massive profit now (as does QR I believe), despite some losses during Covid.

second it is not our National carrier.

It is according to the definition of the Cambridge dictionary (Flag Carrier).

 

[RooFlyer]

So Australia shouldn’t have a national carrier, it should be all foreign airlines operating international and only foreign-owned airlines flying domestic?

Not having a 'national carrier' doesn't mean all operating airlines will be foreign - I thinks that's obvious, isn't it? And if Australians - for whatever reasons - choose not to support an Australian airline, then, well, we don't.

Remember what they say about election results "The voters always get it right". Australian flyers get it right too - they fly on the airlines that suit them, and don't have some North-Korean-like mass idolatry of some (un-)beloved national (former) icon.

I condemn the despicable and un-Australian view that you hold and have expressed on the this forum.

That really hurts. I shall remain a condemned man until you reprieve me.

I get that as an Avios/Velocity FF in Australia, you will lose out by less QR flights, but sometimes, Australia’s national interest, economic sovereignty and prosperity is more important than the individual Avios points balances of disgruntled citizens.

Ouch! Another telling blow. (although its 'fewer', not 'less').

It's really disappointing that any thread these days around QF or QR is completely derailed by total drivel from one certain poster. Gone are the days when there was sensible discussion worth actually reading.

Aw, c'mon its fun. Its all a big leg-pull, you know.

 

[RSVKanga]

second it is not our National carrier. Surely if it was it would help repatriate Australians in times of natural disasters such as getting Australians back home who were stuck overseas with the Covid pandemic. but what happened. Those nasty foreigners brought 87.5% of OS arrivals to Australia from March 2020 to the end of August 2021,

You’re entitled to your (misinformed) opinion as much as you want, but Qantas is the flag carrier of Australia.


The “QaTaR bRoUgHT sO mAnY AuStRaLiAns hOMe DuRiNg the pAnDeMic aNd QaNtAs AbAnDonEd uS!!! ” argument is one that is consistently peddled by the QR lobbyists in Australia, but it’s getting old and tired as many Australians realise the truth. QF has its hubs/bases in Australia (with no unlimited oil funds) and all Australians (including all of QF’s primary customer base) were banned by the federal government from travelling, so QF couldn’t fly international unless the government paid them to. It’s that simple. QR’s customer base is basically the whole world, so QR just flew into Australia at a deep loss and offset those losses by flying from Doha to/from the long list of other non-Australian destinations that were open for business at that time, as well as utilising their oil funds. Please respect the facts.

First you really don't know your history. Qantas was designated Australia's flag carrier in 1947 when the Commonwealth Government bought the company. Surely it disappeared when Qantas was sold by the government in 1993.

Misinformation to the extreme. There are so many countries that have a private company as their flag carrier designated by their federal government. The same applies for Qantas. You cannot argue with the fact that the Australian flag is proudly painted on every Qantas aircraft.

flag carrier

an airline that is or was owned by a government, often with the name of the…

dictionary.cambridge.org

flag carrier
noun [ C ]

TRANSPORT
an airline that is or was owned by a government, often with the name of the country in its name:

and don't have some North-Korean-like mass idolatry of some (un-)beloved national (former) icon.

That’s an incredibly opinionated, biased, provocative and strong statement. I think the silent majority views our flag carrier positively as a national icon and asset that must receive appropriate and sensible levels of protection and support from the Australian people and government.

Not having a 'national carrier' doesn't mean all operating airlines will be foreign

Virgin Australia is an almost 100% foreign-owned, semi-budget narrowbody airline with a very limited network.

 

[justinbrett]

Not having a 'national carrier' doesn't mean all operating airlines will be foreign - I thinks that's obvious, isn't it? And if Australians - for whatever reasons - choose not to support an Australian airline, then, well, we don't.

Remember what they say about election results "The voters always get it right". Australian flyers get it right too - they fly on the airlines that suit them, and don't have some North-Korean-like mass idolatry of some (un-)beloved national (former) icon.

The idea that QF is at risk of collapse is risible. You don't need a "Flag Carrier" but you do need a major home based carrier, and unless VA expands rapidly the government couldn't, and shouldn't, let that situation occur. This is exactly what happened across the ditch.

The Australian public is not a hive mind. Some will fly QF, some will fly other airlines. Many will go with the cheapest.

In any case QF seems to be doing just fine.

 

[RSVKanga]

unless VA expands rapidly

But you ideally need to have something that resonates with the country’s image and culture.

VA should be out of the question as it is almost fully foreign owned by an American firm utilising the naming rights of a British company, and will possibly be in the hands of the State of Qatar soon. They have only been in Australia since 2000s and there is absolutely nothing about their brand identity that resonates with our country’s image and culture.

There is only one airline that meets the current criteria now.

 

[drron]

A flag carrier is an airline or ship line that is owned by the government of the country it is based in. Sometimes this means that the company has a monopoly on some routes, especially those to other countries. The term may have come about because of laws that all planes and ships have to show the flag of the country they are registered in.[1]

Flag carrier - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

simple.wikipedia.org

Yes you just have to pick your definition of Flag carrier

To many people Flag carrier means nothing.

And in the USA it means every airline that is compliant with the Fly America Act.

US Flag Air Carriers | MSU Sponsored Programs Administration

Michigan State University: Advancing Knowledge. Transforming Lives. MSU's teaching and research serve Michigan, the nation, and the world. Est. 1855.

www.cga.msu.edu