QF announce non-stop Perth-London B787 Services

[hutch]

Yes 4 slots.
Given the LHR slots constraints it is interesting that QF are cutting more than 25% of capacity to LHR

They are still using the same number of slots.

 

[moa999]

I am one of those folks that is happy to pay 30-50% more for 20-30% more space especially on long haul. However, I do baulk at paying almost 100% more for 20-30% more space which is often what QF price their premium economy at.

Suggest you do your math again.
You need to account for both width and pitch in PE v Y.
It's much closer to 100% than 20%

 

[katiebell]

Re: QF PER LHR still not for sale

They are still using the same number of slots.

yes they may be using the same number of slots but getting 25% fewer pax/slot.

Also of note: the PE seats are really narrow (17.5") so much worse than PE on other QF aircraft and some of the narrowest in the air

 

[moa999]

Re: QF PER LHR still not for sale

Also of note: the PE seats are really narrow (17.5") so much worse than PE on other QF aircraft and some of the narrowest in the air

Really. This says are 1" wider than the A380 PE seats. 17" is a Y seat width


https://www.ausbt.com.au/first-photos-qantas-boeing-787-premium-economy-seats

 

[hutch]

Re: QF PER LHR still not for sale

yes they may be using the same number of slots but getting 25% fewer pax/slot.

Also of note: the PE seats are really narrow (17.5") so much worse than PE on other QF aircraft and some of the narrowest in the air

Not sure what difference that makes. 25% fewer pax per slot doesn't necessarily mean 25% less revenue. There would be no point flying an A380 to ensure 25% extra capacity if you can obtain a better yield flying a 787 non-stop from PER.

QF may fly this route, not obtain the desired return, and then this decision will be a mistake. But I suggest that QF would have done the sums before doing this (not that airlines always get things right).
.

 

[whatmeworry]

Melbourne the latest City to get shafted by Qantas

So Melbourne finally feels the pain that other cities have endured from Sydney Centric Qantas.

 

[dajop]

Re: QF PER LHR still not for sale

Not sure what difference that makes. 25% fewer pax per slot doesn't necessarily mean 25% less revenue. There would be no point flying an A380 to ensure 25% extra capacity if you can obtain a better yield flying a 787 non-stop from PER.

Or indeed 25% less profit.

 

[astrosly]

Suggest you do your math again.
You need to account for both width and pitch in PE v Y.
It's much closer to 100% than 20%

How so? With difference of roughly 31" to 38" for pitch and only 17.5" to 19" for width there is no way that would be almost double the space with or without maths.

But lets do the calculation anyway: Y 31x17.5 = 542.5 sq inches, PE 38x19=722 sq inches.*
So Y is 75% that of PE, or PE is 33% larger than Y.
*Measurements taken from the QF 747 in seat guru which is the only plane in this class I've flown on QF, and the A380 and B787 wouldn't be too dissimilar. CX PE is only 25% bigger than Y which I've also flown but is priced similar to QF at 75%-100% on top of Y fares at the time.

 

[Pleb Status]

The cancellation of the old QF9/10 and rerouting it via PER is a masterstoke by QF management as it should guarantee full loads at very high prices on the new service.

This route will become highly profitable to QF, as the qSheep will happily pay a very big premium to be packed into a smaller space or a regional J product. Those qSheep who resist will still book the QF codeshare on EK flights ex MEL, so very little revenue will be lost (it should actually increase) by this change.

It will also solve the QF A380 utilisation issues where QF9/10 rarely operates on time and will allow QF to upgauge/increase US/Asian services as necessary.

 

[mannej]

Re: QF PER LHR still not for sale

Yes 4 slots.
Given the LHR slots constraints it is interesting that QF are cutting more than 25% of capacity to LHR

The last time you posted this (I.e QF has 4 slots) you were told that was incorrect were you not?

5 pairs actually.

 

[Brettmcg]

The cancellation of the old QF9/10 and rerouting it via PER is a masterstoke by QF management as it should guarantee full loads at very high prices on the new service.

This route will become highly profitable to QF, as the qSheep will happily pay a very big premium to be packed into a smaller space or a regional J product. Those qSheep who resist will still book the QF codeshare on EK flights ex MEL, so very little revenue will be lost (it should actually increase) by this change.

I disagree. I reckon it will go cough up within two years.

I've actually been surprised at the amount of negative commentary on the social posts I've seen from average punters (not those within the FF/avgeek bubble); many expressing an intention to avoid the non-stop at all costs.

Over time, I've been one of those QSheep to whom you refer and I'm now seriously looking at taking my spend (which has been paid F to Europe for the past couple of years) elsewhere.

 

[Lemon_Party]

I disagree. I reckon it will go cough up within two years.

I've actually been surprised at the amount of negative commentary on the social posts I've seen from average punters (not those within the FF/avgeek bubble); many expressing an intention to avoid the non-stop at all costs.

Over time, I've been one of those QSheep to whom you refer and I'm now seriously looking at taking my spend (which has been paid F to Europe for the past couple of years) elsewhere.

Given both the large proportion of English born population in Perth and many companies with major offices in both Perth and London (BHP, Rio, KPMG, Deloitte etc etc) you'd almost expect there could be sufficient demand for a direct service of the relatively low seat count 787 without adding feed in. Throw in the regions and Adelaide, possibly some MEL pax and it's got to be more likely than not of being pretty successful.

Sure, some people, myself included, simply wouldn't pick a 17 hour flight. But plenty of others either want the journey over as quickly as possible or aren't fussed either way.

As others have noted, people are already used to paying a premium to fly Qantas and seem to be able to sell seats at a premium.

 

[Brettmcg]

Given both the large proportion of English born population in Perth and many companies with major offices in both Perth and London (BHP, Rio, KPMG, Deloitte etc etc) you'd almost expect there could be sufficient demand for a direct service of the relatively low seat count 787 without adding feed in. Throw in the regions and Adelaide, possibly some MEL pax and it's got to be more likely than not of being pretty successful.

Sure, some people, myself included, simply wouldn't pick a 17 hour flight. But plenty of others either want the journey over as quickly as possible or aren't fussed either way.

As others have noted, people are already used to paying a premium to fly Qantas and seem to be able to sell seats at a premium.

...but those conditions (ex-pats, British companies etc.) have been the case for a while now. The fact that this whole service has to commence on the East Coast might suggest that PER alone still doesn't have the demand to warrant a standalone LHR service - surely QF would have started one via DXB in the interim if this were the case?!

I don't doubt that people in PER will pay the premium to avoid backtracking to the East Coast, but I just can't understand why Melburnians would bother. We have a plethora of other options at our disposal which, at most, are 1-1.5 hrs longer at 25-35% less than the price QF want to charge.

Maybe this is a selfish and biased viewpoint, but I don't appear to be the only one expressing it.

 

[moa999]

But lets do the calculation anyway: Y 31x17.5 = 542.5 sq inches, PE 38x19=722 sq inches.*
So Y is 75% that of PE, or PE is 33% larger than Y.
.

It's floor space not passenger space that matters for the airline, or actual seat desnity - so you need to add an allowance for armrests, seat cushions etc which are larger in PE.
I think AusBt says usable width for PE closer to 22"

At 32x18 versus 40x24 (giving 2" vs 1" for seat thickness/bigger tables, arm rests) you are at 67% more for example. And I suspect the actual number is slightly higher

These calcs get difficult for the new staggered business seats with overlapping areas

 

[levelnine]

The upgauge was co-ordinated with Qantas as part of this change.....

EK didn't do it out of the kindness of their heart. They did it because they can make money from it. Other carriers seem to be able to make money out of MEL while QF cannot.

The cancellation of the old QF9/10 and rerouting it via PER is a masterstoke by QF management as it should guarantee full loads at very high prices on the new service.

Unless people abandon QF for other carriers, especially people living in MEL.

I disagree. I reckon it will go cough up within two years.

I've actually been surprised at the amount of negative commentary on the social posts I've seen from average punters (not those within the FF/avgeek bubble); many expressing an intention to avoid the non-stop at all costs.

Over time, I've been one of those QSheep to whom you refer and I'm now seriously looking at taking my spend (which has been paid F to Europe for the past couple of years) elsewhere.

I tend to agree. This would be a supreme irony. Everyone thought the 787 would mark QF's return to Europe with direct flights to Rome, Berlin, Paris, etc etc.

Ironically, it may mark the end of QF's presence in Europe (except for a lone A380 per day from Sydney) if people flock to other carriers.

Just look at the comments on this Guardian piece: https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ustralia-flights-london-perth-launch#comments.

Almost uniformly negative, noting the awful seat width in Y, the lack of toilets, the long flight time without a break, the marginal time saving from the East coast, and the price premium. It looks like your average punter is no longer fooled by the allure of QF.

 

[oz_mark]

EK didn't do it out of the kindness of their heart. They did it because they can make money from it. Other carriers seem to be able to make money out of MEL while QF cannot.

I never said they did it out of the kindness of their heart. I said it was co-ordinated with Qantas, as part of a network change.There is no way they woke up yesterday morning, saw what Qantas were doing, and decided to make the change.

And guess what, Qantas will be codesharing on the flight....

 

[Pleb Status]

I disagree. I reckon it will go cough up within two years.

I've actually been surprised at the amount of negative commentary on the social posts I've seen from average punters (not those within the FF/avgeek bubble); many expressing an intention to avoid the non-stop at all costs.

Over time, I've been one of those QSheep to whom you refer and I'm now seriously looking at taking my spend (which has been paid F to Europe for the past couple of years) elsewhere.

As a new stand alone flight (just PER-LHR v.v), I would have given it two years as well. Being PER based, I cannot see why I would want to fly it in any class (possibly as an award J if nothing else was available) as there are far better options available.

However, by removing ~400 QF seats from the system and adding only ~250 seats back, QF should fill the flight at a premium with qSheep quite easily. If those qSheep actually cared about price or quality of product, they would be have left the herd already.

Like any change, of course there are some negative comments by some, but most of those same people will just suck it up and pay more for less because QF (and the compliant media who reprint press releases) have stated that the service and product is 'game changing' etc.

 

[levelnine]

I never said they did it out of the kindness of their heart. I said it was co-ordinated with Qantas, as part of a network change.There is no way they woke up yesterday morning, saw what Qantas were doing, and decided to make the change.

And guess what, Qantas will be codesharing on the flight....

Of course it was coordinated. It shows a deliberate, informed downgrade of QF services from MEL and other carriers are more than happy to swoop in and fill the space created. And as for your codeshare claim, do a dummy booking MEL-LHR -- only QF1 and QF9 come up. No codeshares with EK available to book.

 

[andyhui01]

Unless people abandon QF for other carriers, especially people living in MEL.

.

The've already assumed people would abandon it (From QF's POV, hopefully to EK). They are using a plane with half the capacity and serving 2-3 cities with that plane. If no one abandoned it, they'd run out of seats anyway. I guess the A380's load factor was too low to be profitable, might as well fill up a 789 to its capacity.

 

[Franky]

Re: Melbourne the latest City to get shafted by Qantas

So Melbourne finally feels the pain that other cities have endured from Sydney Centric Qantas.

I've been meaning to say something similar myself. East Coast has long been spoilt for choice with plenty of F seats, J upgrades, and a number of departure points to Asia and/or Europe. Many of us in PER have long complained about the choice of a once a day QF 737 to Singapore, which has mostly fallen on deaf ears. That said, having flown JFK-HKG direct in the past, we'll still fly to Europe thru Asian ports, which also avoids a ME transit which some prefer. Two legs we can handle.