Qatar denied extra capacity into Australia

[Quickstatus]

incident in DOH involving 13 women of which only 5 are taking it further I believe.

Not taking it further implies that it was OK?

ban Qatar

No one is banning anyone.

Reading through this entire thread, I'm of the view the Govt was/is trying the behind the scene softly softly approach for which I am sympathetic to. Diplomacy often requires this and backchannels can often be very effective because it eliminates all the noise from various interest groups and allows both parties to move forward with as much of their interests intact.

King had other considerations (we know what they are - the unspoken reason is usually the best reason) apart from the pure "by the book apolitical tick box" that the public service was using for their recommendations.

Albo is smartly trying to keep this within the Department of Transportation portfolio in order to signal to the Qataris that this is no big deal - just a small matter of the court case that needs to go away. Bilateral relationships between countries are fraught with problems but are important in the overall perspective. Qatar is not a big trading partner overall but it is a major trading partner in the region and there have been many top level representations from Australia to Qatar over the years that is not worth risking.

 

[RooFlyer]

So, after the Minister's interview on AM this morning, is anyone the wiser about anything?

Why would she say that VA had strongly (my word) lobbied her (VA being a third party), but then say there was another 'third party', un-named? Why name one third party, but not another? Deflection. Was it a lobbyist firm working for ... um... I don't know .... Qantas?

The DOH incident was key in the recent refusal, but yet QR are 'welcome' to add additional flights to other airports. Que? If the government is 'punishing' Qatar for the DOH incident, why isn't it being done through the Department of Foreign Affairs? The FA Minister wasn't involved in the decision, according to the FA minister.

 

[justinbrett]

So, after the Minister's interview on AM this morning, is anyone the wiser about anything?

Why would she say that VA had strongly (my word) lobbied her (VA being a third party), but then say there was another 'third party', un-named? Why name one third party, but not another? Deflection. Was it a lobbyist firm working for ... um... I don't know .... Qantas?

Oh good, I thought you were accusing me in an earlier post for "rewriting history" saying VA was the chief lobbyist - it is exactly what the minister has said (rightly or wrongly).

The answer she gave in QT rules out QF:
I do routinely meet with CEOs of all airlines, airports and peak bodies, and from my recollection the main people lobbying me about Qatar came from Virgin and a third party in my office on behalf of Qatar. The discussions I have had recently with Qantas have been about their concerns about our same job, same pay legislation

So if the lobbying is on behalf of Qatar - it's someone in favour of Qatar. My guess is either the Federation of Travel Agents (they made a submission on the QR/EK deal) or even Flight Centre directly (who has been very vocal about it).

 

[Princess Fiona]

Closing this thread for moderation

 

[serfty]

[moderator hat]

Other than acknowledging the occurrence in relation to the minister's decision, further specific discussion relative to what happened in Doha three years ago should be undertaken in the thread below, rather than cluttering this thread:

Australian women on Qatar flight internally examined

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-25/passengers-invasively-searched-qatar-after-report-foetus-found/12811716 Reported today on several news outlets. Utterly horrific. Totally inexcusable. Can’t imagine the distress. Surely DNA cheek swabs could have been used instead if they were that...

www.australianfrequentflyer.com.au

[/moderator hat]

 

[OATEK]

..
And its funny - the DOH incident seems to be a block to additional flights into the major gateways, but QR are free to fly extra flights elsewhere. In fact it just heard the Minister say on ABC AM they would be 'welcome' to do that.
..

I think there is a big difference between refusing additional flights above the allocation in an existing treaty, and tearing the treaty up by making substantial changes. The quotas in the existing treaty only cover the key gateway cities, and my understanding is that this has been the case from somewhere back in the 2000s. Yes the government could reduce the allocations into the key gateways, but that would be less diplomatic than saying you have what you have until the unspoken conditions for increasing the allocations have been met.

 

[Lynda2475]

King reveals 'context' behind Qatar Airways blockage after intense grilling

Federal Transport Minister Catherine King has admitted the invasive strip searches of a group of Australian women in Doha Airport was a factor at play behind the decision to block Qatar Airways’ request for additional flight capacity.

www.skynews.com.au

For those crying poor QR consider they have current options they arent exploiting i.e Canberra.

 

[jrfsp]

King reveals 'context' behind Qatar Airways blockage after intense grilling

Federal Transport Minister Catherine King has admitted the invasive strip searches of a group of Australian women in Doha Airport was a factor at play behind the decision to block Qatar Airways’ request for additional flight capacity.

www.skynews.com.au

For those crying poor QR consider they have current options they arent exploiting i.e Canberra.

But it makes no commercial sense, QF doesnt even fly intl out of ADL, never mind CBR. QR have no further options for the airports that make commercial sense.

 

[justinbrett]

But it makes no commercial sense, QF doesnt even fly intl out of ADL, never mind CBR. QR have no further options for the airports that make commercial sense.

The fact QF doesn't fly out of ADL is irrelevant. It's pretty common for local airlines to operate out of main hubs, leaving secondary ports for foreign carriers.

As an example, LAS is a major tourist and convention destination (and a fairly large metro area), yet has no long haul services operated by US carriers. It is served by multiple foreign carriers.

I've said this before, in post #46:

It's very common for local carriers to focus on their hub cities, with foreign airlines more likely to serve additional destinations. BA have more destinations in the USA than any US carrier have origins for European services. Reverse is true for UK services - BA focus on London. QF and NZ have more destinations in the USA than any US carrier has origins. This is repeated often in other markets.

ADL is in a perfect location to be served by domestic connections - it's not like you have to backtrack to fly anywhere - unless you're going to Antarctica. If ADL was where DRW is, there's probably far more chance it would have international services.

 

[jrfsp]

The fact QF doesn't fly out of ADL is irrelevant. It's pretty common for local airlines to operate out of main hubs, leaving secondary ports for foreign carriers.

As an example, LAS is a major tourist and convention destination (and a fairly large metro area), yet has no long haul services operated by US carriers. It is served by multiple foreign carriers.

I've said this before, in post #46:

It's very common for local carriers to focus on their hub cities, with foreign airlines more likely to serve additional destinations. BA have more destinations in the USA than any US carrier have origins for European services. Reverse is true for UK services - BA focus on London. QF and NZ have more destinations in the USA than any US carrier has origins. This is repeated often in other markets.

ADL is in a perfect location to be served by domestic connections - it's not like you have to backtrack to fly anywhere - unless you're going to Antarctica. If ADL was where DRW is, there's probably far more chance it would have international services.

LAS makes commercial sense for those foreign carriers.

As i said, QR has no further options to add flights to commercially viable ports.

 

[levelnine]

If ADL was where DRW is, there's probably far more chance it would have international services.

And if Australia were located on Mars, there's probably far more chance it would have fewer international services.

I absolutely love all these armchair CEOs thinking they know where it makes sense for Qatar to fly more than Qatar itself.

The reasoning in this thread is truly magical at times.

 

[justinbrett]

LAS makes commercial sense for those foreign carriers.

As i said, QR has no further options to add flights to commercially viable ports.

You can make the argument it's less profitable than others, but I'm not sure there's evidence ADL isn't commercially viable.

That may well be the case but I've not seen QR nor anyone else say that, in fact when interviewed by Ross Greenwood late last year, QR CEO said he would "look at opportunities we would get to other cities in Australia to connect the Australian people to the very large network of Qatar Airways".

Qatar Airways CEO defends Australian expansion ambitions

Qatar Airways CEO Akbar Al Baker has defended his company’s bid to expand its services in Australia, as Sky News Australia recently revealed Qantas was lobbying the government to block Qatar's efforts to add extra flights. “We connected Australian people to the world during the most difficult...

www.skynews.com.au

 

[Quickstatus]

Reading through this entire thread, I'm of the view the Govt was/is trying the behind the scene softly softly approach for which I am sympathetic to. Diplomacy often requires this and backchannels can often be very effective because it eliminates all the noise from various interest groups and allows both parties to move forward with as much of their interests intact.

King had other considerations (we know what they are - the unspoken reason is usually the best reason) apart from the pure "by the book apolitical tick box" that the public service was using for their recommendations.

Albo is smartly trying to keep this within the Department of Transportation portfolio in order to signal to the Qataris that this is no big deal - just a small matter of the court case that needs to go away. Bilateral relationships between countries are are important in the overall perspective. Qatar is not a big trading partner overall but it is a major trading partner in the region and there have been many top level representations from Australia to Qatar over the years that is not worth risking the relationship whatever the disagreement.

 

[jrfsp]

You can make the argument it's less profitable than others, but I'm not sure there's evidence ADL isn't commercially viable.

That may well be the case but I've not seen QR nor anyone else say that, in fact when interviewed by Ross Greenwood late last year, QR CEO said he would "look at opportunities we would get to other cities in Australia to connect the Australian people to the very large network of Qatar Airways".

Qatar Airways CEO defends Australian expansion ambitions

Qatar Airways CEO Akbar Al Baker has defended his company’s bid to expand its services in Australia, as Sky News Australia recently revealed Qantas was lobbying the government to block Qatar's efforts to add extra flights. “We connected Australian people to the world during the most difficult...

www.skynews.com.au

huh, i didnt say anything about ADL - they already fly to ADL and i have no doubt its profitable (the terminating flight anyhow)

I was responded to the comment that QR has further options open to them should they want to expand flights into AU - ie CBR, OOL etc. None of these are realistically commercially viable.

 

[Lynda2475]

If as some here claim extra QR flights will make fares so much cheaper (something I dispute as QR are on the expensive end of the airfare spectrum) then flights to/from CBR should be viable, as in addition to ACT natives some from greater Sydney could drive/bus to CBR for the savings and others connect to CBR instead of SYD.

Fiji Airways have decided CBR is viable.

 

[straitman]

Fiji Airways have decided CBR is viable.

Quite a different scenario IMHO. One destination that is ‘relatively’ short haul. (ie 4hrs 5min)

 

[justinbrett]

huh, i didnt say anything about ADL - they already fly to ADL and i have no doubt its profitable (the terminating flight anyhow)

I was responded to the comment that QR has further options open to them should they want to expand flights into AU - ie CBR, OOL etc. None of these are realistically commercially viable.

You did mention ADL, you brought up the fact that QF doesn't fly there as somehow relevant to QR's route selection.

I mistook the commercial viability statement to extend to ADL, so I'll withdraw that. Of course, SQ has had success with secondary ports.

If as some here claim extra QR flights will make fares so much cheaper (something I dispute as QR are on the expensive end of the airfare spectrum) then flights to/from CBR should be viable, as in addition to ACT natives some from greater Sydney could drive/bus to CBR for the savings and others connect to CBR instead of SYD.

Fiji Airways have decided CBR is viable.

QR CEO when asked (clip above) if he would commit to lowering fares if given more capacity, actually said "our fares are already very reasonable" but said it would stop them going up further. That was in Oct 22, I haven't been following QR fares closely but have they gone up since then? I've fairly certain other carriers have come down since then.

 

[drron]

So, after the Minister's interview on AM this morning, is anyone the wiser about anything?

Indeed I am. much more certain that the Minister is either incompetent, being thrown to the lions or both.
So you tell members of the public the QR decision on 10/7 yet only inform the PM on the 18/7.
Well we know that there were many organisations plus State governments putting in their submissions so the PM should have known earlier in case he was asked a question. And in fact he was asked a question on the subject from VA.

Yes possibly just a stuff up but Ministers should be held to account for those.
However I am reminded of the old saying - more are undone by the cover up rather than the initial decision.

 

[Pushka]

ADL is in a perfect location to be served by domestic connections - it's not like you have to backtrack to fly anywhere - unless you're going to Antarctica. If ADL was where DRW is, there's probably far more chance it would have international services.

Sure. If you want to add five hours minimum to an already 24 hours flight.

 

[justinbrett]

Quite a different scenario IMHO. One destination that is ‘relatively’ short haul.

Actually from the reporting I've seen, FJ have plans to be the Doha of the Pacific (my words, not theirs). But essentially offer a lot more flights to the US connecting to Australia / NZ.

Of course, Fiji would have to increase capacity in the Air Services Agreement - something Australia already wants but has been blocked by them.