Qatar denied extra capacity into Australia

[Pushka]

There is plenty of choice and low-cost carriers flooding the market in Australia. There is not a lack of competition in Australia, and certainly people wouldn't be travelling with Qantas because they have to. Am heading to the US next month with SQ - choice is there - you just need to look. Also, why should Qatar with the myriad of human rights abuses; staff who never made it home and anachronistic attitude towards women - be given a welcome mat in this country? Just because of the 'Q-Suite'? Nothing about the airline rings true, and I wish for once travellers adopted a moral compass when it comes to their choice of carrier. Right call by the ALP.

The thing I've learned from the posters on this forum is that the term 'moral compass' has different interpretations. And a blinkered approach to history.

 

[Gold Member]

Why am I notified that my posts on this thread have been deleted by a Moderator without providing any reason. A simple explanation or some commentary would be the courteous and professional approach, or even a general catch all “refer to AFF T&Cs” throwaway would even suffice. Am I asking too much?

 

[jrfsp]

Damn im out of popcorn

 

[Layslow]

The thing I've learned from the posters on this forum is that the term 'moral compass' has different interpretations. And a blinkered approach to history.

Righteo, that explains pretty much nothing.... But here is a little appetiser on the type of guy we are dealing with here......

Qatar Air CEO Says a Woman Could Never Do His Job

Qatar Airways 'has to be led by a man'

time.com

 

[Pushka]

Righteo, that explains pretty much nothing.... But here is a little appetiser on the type of guy we are dealing with here......

Qatar Air CEO Says a Woman Could Never Do His Job

Qatar Airways 'has to be led by a man'

time.com

It does to many here.

 

[RooFlyer]

Well we both agree the hardness of the lobbying wasn't a function of the cause then.

Cause of the decision? I think very hard lobbying by Qantas had a very large influence in the decision not to allow QR further landing/capacity rights. If you agree with that, then good-o.

Do you really think QF's boutique services to Europe are going to be impacted by more QR flights? No, especially when they're putting their money on non-stop services (PER, Sunrise) or those who want to fly via SIN.

What do you mean by 'boutique services'? Comfortable journeys at a decent price, with excellent connections within Europe and elsewhere?

Yes, I think QR getting additional capacity to fly Australians to Europe would impact QF's services through to Europe. And I reckon Qantas does too.

Also, why should Qatar with the myriad of human rights abuses; staff who never made it home and anachronistic attitude towards women - be given a welcome mat in this country?

The mat's already there - has been for a long time, including bringing Australians home during the pandemic, when the 'Spirit of Australia' abandoned them.

Nothing about the airline rings true, and I wish for once travellers adopted a moral compass when it comes to their choice of carrier. Right call by the ALP.

What rings true for me is that its an excellent flight product. Please don't moralise here. As @levelnine pointed out, if your 'moral compass' was consistent, the number of airlines available to you would shrink a lot. You know how far the death penalty extends age-wise in the USA? In any case, how are we off for Australia's treatment of certain classes of people? We've been condemned in the UN. How's the moral compass faring?

You fly the way you want and let us fly the way we want, within Australian law and regulations.

 

[RooFlyer]

Am heading to the US next month with SQ - choice is there - you just need to look.

Excellent advice, thanks. . Isn't it lovely that SQ is allowed such a wide range of flights in and out of Australia.

 

[justinbrett]

Cause of the decision? I think very hard lobbying by Qantas had a very large influence in the decision not to allow QR further landing/capacity rights. If you agree with that, then good-o.

My point was you either lobby or you don't - you don't lobby soft or hard. I thought you agreed, my mistake.

What do you mean by 'boutique services'? Comfortable journeys at a decent price, with excellent connections within Europe and elsewhere?

Yes, I think QR getting additional capacity to fly Australians to Europe would impact QF's services through to Europe. And I reckon Qantas does too.

I'm not sure if you read my post correctly, I'm saying QF services are boutique in that they have 2x daily services to Europe (seasonally 3 including FCO) and represent a very small part of the Aus-Europe market. A lot of those pax are travelling because they specifically want to fly QF and/or want to fly the routes. We know that ex DXB wasn't popular which is why QF moved back to SIN.

With so much capacity held by airlines like SQ, would a couple more QR services impact QF? I don't think so. They're already a minority player and have points of distinction to retain their current market share.

Excellent advice, thanks. . Isn't it lovely that SQ is allowed such a wide range of flights in and out of Australia.

Because it's a mutual benefit to Australia, with our airlines given fifth freedom rights out of SIN.

 

[RooFlyer]

I'm not sure if you read my post correctly, I'm saying QF services are boutique

Ooops, yes, sorry, I did mis-read.

With so much capacity held by airlines like SQ, would a couple more QR services impact QF? I don't think so. They're already a minority player and have points of distinction to retain their current market share.

I think it would impact QF, but lets say it wouldn't materially, and Qantas thought it wouldn't too. I think they would still prefer to keep competitors out of 'their patch' and act accordingly.

Can you speculate on reasons the federal government might have given QR when it declined its request?

Separately, as I appreciate you do know your way around the airline industry, what would be the process for TK to get new landing rights and capacity here Vs QR asking for additional capacity?

 

[MooTime]

Your post is contradictory in a myriad of ways.

Your post presumes there is ample competition. Why not, therefore, allow existing competitors to make the decision for themselves about how much capacity to fly into Australia? Unless there is evidence of anti-competitive conduct (eg capacity dumping), let the suppliers decide how to fly to this country just as you are free to decide which carrier you fly.

Qatar are already allow to fly into this country. So it's human rights record is irrelevant. If it were relevant, it would have already been banned. And if we start banning airlines from countries with human rights records that we do not like, where do we stop? The US ran Guantanamo for years. Are they gone? Singapore is a semi-authoritarian regime. Is it gone? Emirates, Etihad. Also gone? Sri Lanka is descending into authoritarianism. India has a horrific human rights record. China, Indonesia, ... That's one way to guarantee there will be no airlines flying into Australia and we are locked inside our country.

How about you decide where you spend your travel dollars and you let everyone else decide where to spend their travel dollars?

great post, those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.....Australia & it's Aboriginal historical treatments.
Put your hand up if you've never done a bad bad thing!
QF protecting itself, understandably.

ripping thread of posts, interesting on both sides. I'm surprised the entire thread hasn't been moderated.

@justinbrett , I think you've mentioned VA like 5 times whilst nobody else has. Trying to put them in the blame basket too? Keep trying.

 

[PERLHR]

Shocking decision. It shows yet again that Australia is anti competitive especially for air services where the travelling public pay a fortune to use poor airports, limited facilities, and inflated airfares.

 

[justinbrett]

I think it would impact QF, but lets say it wouldn't materially, and Qantas thought it wouldn't too. I think they would still prefer to keep competitors out of 'their patch' and act accordingly.

Sure, as I said, both QF and VA routinely lobby whenever these things come up that don't suit them. It's just what they do, why wouldn't you try?

Can you speculate on reasons the federal government might have given QR when it declined its request?

Separately, as I appreciate you do know your way around the airline industry, what would be the process for TK to get new landing rights and capacity here Vs QR asking for additional capacity?

I don't use the term landing rights as that to me speaks of airport slots, which is a whole other ball game.

This is covered by the Australia/Qatar Air Services Agreement, which is a treaty between the AUS & QAR governments. It is not an airline to government agreement. It was last updated in 2022, where it was increased from 21 to 28 services per week.

It's very different for a codeshare/joint venture application, where the onus is on the government to say why it's not approved; these bilateral treaties are only ever approved with approval of both governments, so there would not have to be a reason given. I'm sure they'd bury it in diplomatic speak anyway.

Australia's treaty with Turkey was signed in 2010, and allow for 7 services per week in either direction. So TK would not need any further government approval (other than CASA for an foreign AOC), it just needs to get the airport slots.

 

[Pushka]

great post, those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.....Australia & it's Aboriginal historical treatments.
Put your hand up if you've never done a bad bad thing!
QF protecting itself, understandably.

ripping thread of posts, interesting on both sides. I'm surprised the entire thread hasn't been moderated.

It has been.

 

[Zanzara]

AFR comments are centred around the decision will boost Qantas’ international earnings and that customers will inevitably pay more. It does mention the legal case around strip searching of female passengers that is still pending.

Minister blocks bid to bring down airfares, boost tourism

Qatar Airways’ bid to boost flights into Australia, bringing international visitors and increasing cargoes for export, has been thwarted.

www.afr.com

Travellers to pay more after Qatar rebuffed: airports

Airports and tourism operators slammed the government decision to disallow further Qatar slots, which will sustain high fares and benefit Qantas.

www.afr.com

 

[HS-TQE]

judging by the number of people here on AFF who go out of their way to avoid the B737 trans-con, I’m not so sure that’ll be an attractive, international product versus competitors. are they going to have lie- flats?

Reportedly the first tranche of Qantas A321XLRs will be in the domestic/short haul international config (20J) which suggest 5 rows of recliners. ADL-SIN will be a very slim chance in the domestic/short international config

 

[Zanzara]

It has been.

With no clear explanation

 

[Pushka]

With no clear explanation

No, I just know that I quoted a post that was redacted but I wasn't actually speaking to the redacted part, so just that redacted bit was removed. I have no idea what it was though. It truly doesn't bother me as most seems to get through as long as it doesn't get personal or abusive or liable to defamation. Or Political. Comments around which are always banned.

 

[Zanzara]

Reportedly the first tranche of Qantas A321XLRs will be in the domestic/short haul international config (20J) which suggest 5 rows of recliners. ADL-SIN will be a very slim chance in the domestic/short international config

If QF have no meaningful competition and QF can charge what they like to maintain profitability and cover their costs, then I am sure they will fly from ADL again.

 

[justinbrett]

AFR comments are centred around the decision will boost Qantas’ international earnings and that customers will inevitably pay more. It does mention the legal case around strip searching of female passengers that is still pending.

Minister blocks bid to bring down airfares, boost tourism

Qatar Airways’ bid to boost flights into Australia, bringing international visitors and increasing cargoes for export, has been thwarted.

www.afr.com

Travellers to pay more after Qatar rebuffed: airports

Airports and tourism operators slammed the government decision to disallow further Qatar slots, which will sustain high fares and benefit Qantas.

www.afr.com

That AFR article is very poorly written.

One tourism operator said Australia needed to do more to negotiate open skies agreements instead of relying on bilateral air agreements,
-An open sky agreement is a bilateral air services agreement

which he derided as “really just a smoke screen for quotas or limits to the number of flights allowed”.
-That's literally what the treaty is for. There's no smoke screen.

Qantas instead flies to London via Singapore, which is a more lucrative route because it is allowed to sell tickets on each leg of the journey, rather than strictly Sydney to London
-UAE grants 5th freedom to Australian airlines too. QF sold DXB-LHR separately too.

United confirmed on Tuesday that it was still waiting for government approval to launch a route between Brisbane and Los Angeles.
-Australia and the US have an open skies agreement so no Australian government permission is required. UA must either be refering to its own government or some kind of AAIF approval.

 

[anyonebutqantas]

The government should have just said to Qantas - if you don't want Qatar to have more slots, then start Qantas flights to Doha from every Australian capital city. Otherwise, shut up and let Qatar fly as many planes as they want here.