Qatar denied extra capacity into Australia

[justinbrett]

Which size 747? 100? SP? 400? 800?

Sounds like a journalist wrote that air services agreement - where everything is either a jumbo or a Cessna.

-200, -300, -400 and Combi all count as 1.0. SP/-100/-8 isn't mentioned.

Needless to say some of these agreements are very old (or based on previous agreements that are even older).

 

[PERLHR]

I take note of all these moral ground standings yet here we are in a country where just about everything you buy in terms of white goods, tourist tat, electrical stuff generally, just about everything in DIYs are all made in China. Anyone want to talk about their human rights etc etc. Nothing is made in Australia. Don't take the moral ground people Qatar Airlines are a fine carrier and as such an airline trying to offer Australians and others more options and it's been rejected. Shameful.

 

[justinbrett]

The numbers listed in the IASC document doesn't count what is already assigned to Australian airlines. To see what the agreements allow a non Australian carrier, you need to add in what Australian airlines already have. Not a problem for the Qatar limit listed, but it is for the Thailand listed amount.

The capacities (at least for the agreements I've seen) apply to both Australian and Foreign airlines.

Ie, for Qatar, QR can fly 28 services per week, and QF/VA can fly another 28 services per week.

The foreign available and used capacity is in a separate document - https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/s...gn-airlines-northern-summer2023-april2023.pdf.

 

[RooFlyer]

Comparing a government entity with a private one, like Qantas - and the expectation, though technically bankrupt during COVID they should have done the decent thing and kept operating - is just childish.

You may wish to zip the name-calling. There was no expectation about Qantas - just the comment that Qatar did keep flights to Australia when the situation was pretty dire for returnees Vs no flights (other than govt charters)

Also references to the death penalty in the US ring hollow - its only instigated when there are serious crimes

And can be instigated to children, which is what I was getting at. You know how the death penalty in the various states is applied; think a child in that situation. How's the moral compass about that, exactly?

Also simple question - what does Qatar give Australia in reciprocal rights? Its a country of 2.5 million..... They give us nothing - but want access to our biggest population centres.... Do better guys.

Do better than what, exactly? Provide an air service which is one of the best around? High quality international flights out of ADL (unlike Qantas) and other ports that are very popular with Australians, with arguably the best J product in the skies? Being a lifelong 'Roo Flyer', I know damn well they are doing better than Qantas for flyers.

"What does Qatar give Australia in reciprocal rights?" you ask. Well, see justinbrett's post above. 28 & 28. How's that for 'reciprocal'?

 

[drron]

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.

Maybe UA are stalling getting approval. Seems they are running a bit short of captains.

CHICAGO, July 18 (Reuters) - United Airlines (UAL.O) first officer Phil Anderson has turned down opportunities to be promoted to captain as he does not want the unpredictable schedule that comes with the bigger paycheck.

Anderson is one of many who have passed on that promotion at United, and analysts and union officials said a resulting shortage of captains - who function as head pilots - could cut the number of flights available to travelers by next summer. One industry official dubbed it the "no one wants to be a junior captain syndrome."

Focus: United Airlines grapples with pilots avoiding the captain's chair

Many pilots are turning down the captain's job as they do not want the unpredictable schedule that comes with the bigger paycheck.

www.reuters.com

 

[HS-TQE]

IIRC, UA's AAIF announcement only covers BNE-SFO route (which goes daily from October). As mentioned previously BNE-LAX iirc is not eligible for AAIF as QF is already operating on that sector.

Also, the BNE-LAX route at this stage is seasonal as there are no flights loaded from April 2024 onwards, most likely UA is wanting to see how that goes as they take QF head on and UA are putting in their own coin and risk in a Queensland market for the first time since their short lived BNE-SYD-LAX tag in the 90s (ie no Qld Government support).

 

[Layslow]

I take note of all these moral ground standings yet here we are in a country where just about everything you buy in terms of white goods, tourist tat, electrical stuff generally, just about everything in DIYs are all made in China. Anyone want to talk about their human rights etc etc. Nothing is made in Australia. Don't take the moral ground people Qatar Airlines are a fine carrier and as such an airline trying to offer Australians and others more options and it's been rejected. Shameful.

This thread isn't about China, its about Qatar, and Qatar Airways in particular. The CEO has been implicated in the murder of one of his own executive team, whose crime was to resign from his role at the airline. Enjoy your Q-Suite....

Travel exec’s widow details husband’s ‘torture’ in Qatar before death

Nancy Bennett says her husband endured ‘mental and physical torture’ during a three-week detention before he died

www.standard.co.uk

 

[jakeseven7]

This thread isn't about China, its about Qatar, and Qatar Airways in particular. The CEO has been implicated in the murder of one of his own executive team, whose crime was to resign from his role at the airline. Enjoy your Q-Suite....

Travel exec’s widow details husband’s ‘torture’ in Qatar before death

Nancy Bennett says her husband endured ‘mental and physical torture’ during a three-week detention before he died

www.standard.co.uk

This thread is about a lot of things that’s for sure!

 

[levelnine]

Enjoy your Q-Suite....

Thank you. Now please stop trying to impose your concerns on other people & support an open, competitive airline market. Let customers vote with their feet.

 

[PERLHR]

This thread isn't about China, its about Qatar, and Qatar Airways in particular. The CEO has been implicated in the murder of one of his own executive team, whose crime was to resign from his role at the airline. Enjoy your Q-Suite....

Travel exec’s widow details husband’s ‘torture’ in Qatar before death

Nancy Bennett says her husband endured ‘mental and physical torture’ during a three-week detention before he died

www.standard.co.uk

Certainly don't see the UK nor anywhere else really treating QR like Australia for the reasons you link (sad as the allegations are). Not that "The Standard" is really a high quality newspaper although respect is out there for Channel 4 news. Yes the thread : it is meant to be about an airline that is trying to expand its market but gets curtailed by an Australian Govt that, for many people, shows support to anticompetitive processes for an airline (Qantas) that many believe never has embraced any competition.

 

[Melburnian1]

Although we like to point the finger at countries like Malaysia, Indonesia and to a lesser extent Philippines and South Korea, there's plenty of corruption in Australia.

Politicians are influenced by their CL membership, there's no doubt.

I don't like the Qatari government or the CEO of QR, and the treatment women received in the infamous incident was very poor and uncalled for, but we just can't be protecting QF (or VA!) from competition when foreign airlines like QR (which I've not used) apparently provide a very high level of passenger comfort.

Where was Qantas during the COVID era? It generally did not collect Australians to bring them home unless the then Coalition government stumped up with a subsidy, but competitors such as United, Singapore and Qatar continued to operate during much of this period, without payment from our governments. United even took out ads post-COVID in major newspapers reminding us of this.

And might I add, punctuality and reliability on flagship routes such as Australia to London/Europe: look at QF1 timetabled ex SYD yesterday: delayed 15 hours overnight, not for the first time.

 

[justinbrett]

@AFF Editor The UAE treaty isn't exactly open skies; it's 154 services weekly (x22 daily) with an additional 21 services weekly to secondary ports via another gateway.

As good as open skies for practical purposes, but not exactly.

 

[Melburnian1]

We don't know, but the government boffins know the pie is limited, and this is a state funded carrier that's happy to throw cash around - not out of the goodness of their hearts (and refer to @Pushka on pricing). Why not force QR into serving more secondary ports?

Right-o. So because PepsiCo (USA, Twisties) and Snack Brands Australia (German/Filipino, Cheezels, French Fries) are foreign owned but compete against Green's General Foods (popcorn and others), let's restrict the two former to 10,000 tonnes each of production a year.

Passengers, just like Woolies, IGA and Coles shoppers need choice. If QR is regarded as better value than QFi, why shouldn't it be allowed to increase its flight frequencies?

Given inbound tourist numbers remain at least 23 per cent down and outbound Australians 11 per cent down on equivalent months in 2019, there's plenty of room for cheaper fares, coupled with a greater choice of carriers, to stimulate the overseas travel market.

Racketeering doesn't appear to just occur in Colombia...

 

[justinbrett]

Right-o. So because PepsiCo (USA, Twisties) and Snack Brands Australia (German/Filipino, Cheezels, French Fries) are foreign owned but compete against Green's General Foods (popcorn and others), let's restrict the two former to 10,000 tonnes each of production a year.

Passengers, just like Woolies, IGA and Coles shoppers need choice. If QR is regarded as better value than QFi, why shouldn't it be allowed to increase its flight frequencies?

Given inbound tourist numbers remain at least 23 per cent down and outbound Australians 11 per cent down on equivalent months in 2019, there's plenty of room for cheaper fares, coupled with a greater choice of carriers, to stimulate the overseas travel market.

Racketeering doesn't appear to just occur in Colombia...

You have heard of import tariffs, right?

If those companies are producing the products in Australia with Australian staff, then the analogy would be VAi, not QR, and VAi is eligible for Australian traffic rights.

Like it or not international aviation still runs on bilateral treaties, and the problem for QAT is they are offering something nobody (Australian airlines) wants. SGP, UAE, NZL and USA all offer us something we want (or wanted at the time it was signed) in return.

 

[Melburnian1]

Like it or not international aviation still runs on bilateral treaties, and the problem for QAT is they are offering something nobody (Australian airlines) wants.

But consumers (passengers) want more choice, better quality, punctuality, reliability and lower fares, all of which QFi is opposed to, unable to offer or declines to provide.

QFi and JQi carry a minority of international passengers, even with the ongoing protection racket.

As levelnine implies, markets operate best when consumers, not bureacrats, are sovereign.

What QFi has lobbied for is against the national interest.

Why don't you go and ask what tourism operators and other small businesses along Victoria's Great Ocean Road, in WA's Margaret River or in NSW's Blue mountains think of restricting innovative airlines' capacity into and out of Oz?

The best step all of us can take is to choose alternatives to QFi and JQi, including QR (the latter which I have never used).

 

[AFF Editor]

@AFF Editor The UAE treaty isn't exactly open skies; it's 154 services weekly (x22 daily) with an additional 21 services weekly to secondary ports via another gateway.

As good as open skies for practical purposes, but not exactly.

Thanks - updated the article.

 

[PERLHR]

You have heard of import tariffs, right?

If those companies are producing the products in Australia with Australian staff, then the analogy would be VAi, not QR, and VAi is eligible for Australian traffic rights.

Like it or not international aviation still runs on bilateral treaties, and the problem for QAT is they are offering something nobody (Australian airlines) wants. SGP, UAE, NZL and USA all offer us something we want (or wanted at the time it was signed) in return.

Actually in the UK and EU bilateral agreements with the likes of Qatar are a thing of the past. Access deals are in place and I don't think we all need reminding of how many European and UK airports Qatar fly into do we? Australia is acting like a closed shop.

 

[justinbrett]

But consumers (passengers) want more choice, better quality, punctuality, reliability and lower fares, all of which QFi is opposed to, unable to offer or declines to provide.

QFi and JQi carry a minority of international passengers, even with the ongoing protection racket.

As levelnine implies, markets operate best when consumers, not bureacrats, are sovereign.

What QFi has lobbied for is against the national interest.

Why don't you go and ask what tourism operators and other small businesses along Victoria's Great Ocean Road, in WA's Margaret River or in NSW's Blue mountains think of restricting innovative airlines' capacity into and out of Oz?

The best step all of us can take is to choose alternatives to QFi and JQi, including QR (the latter which I have never used).

You're free to fly EK or SQ which both offer plenty of seats and I hear are quite highly rated.

This is about governments, not airlines.

Not sure why you're blaming me for the current system, I'm just stating what it is.

Actually in the UK and EU bilateral agreements with the likes of Qatar are a thing of the past. Access deals are in place and I don't think we all need reminding of how many European and UK airports Qatar fly into do we? Australia is acting like a closed shop.

Australia has open skies agreements too, just not with Qatar.

UK/EU still have bilateral agreements, just not all are restricted. Same as us. An open skies agreement is a kind of bilateral treaty.

 

[Gold Member]

This decision and outcome from the Australian Government smacks of Anti-competitive behaviour. The ACCC needs to come down on them hard

It’s time the ACCC had their powers vastly expanded to override the Chairman’s Lounge Politburo and support the interests of the Australian public, and not the Fat Cats in Canberra.

 

[PERLHR]

You're free to fly EK or SQ which both offer plenty of seats and I hear are quite highly rated.

That's the crux though many would prefer to fly QR instead of the aforementioned and of course QF. Why can't we be free to fly QR to the same degree? Well we know why despite all the "debate".. And while "agreements" open skies policy and application is not bilateral treaties. Infact they are treated differently hence, believe it or not, are called as such. You are right though, Australia has many restricted practices.