QF9 / QF10 Perth

[jase05]

It’s not QF’s fault

It’s not as if QF had a gun to their head demanding they lease slots to BA.
It actually is their fault, they were the idiots that gave up the slots

 

[justinbrett]

they were the idiots that gave up the slots

The great thing about leasing an asset is you can take it back when you need it again. It’s actually the smart thing to do.

 

[jase05]

The great thing about leasing an asset is you can take it back when you need it again. It’s actually the smart thing to do.

Agree with that but a bit rich to say it’s not their fault when they willingly gave those slots up and I presume sold others?

 

[justinbrett]

Agree with that but a bit rich to say it’s not their fault

No arguments there. I think NZ sold theirs though, so no going back for them.

Also it’s crazy LHR allow slot trading like this.

 

[Cloud9]

The great thing about leasing an asset is you can take it back when you need it again. It’s actually the smart thing to do.

Sorry to be a pedant, but unless the terms of the lease allow for it to be broken early, then it'll be taken back at the end of the lease. That's not necessarily the same as when you need it.

 

[jase05]

No arguments there. I think NZ sold theirs though, so no going back for them.

Also it’s crazy LHR allow slot trading like this.

As was also mentioned earlier, didn’t QF have more than 4 slots at one time?
Do you know what happened to them at at what timeframe?

 

[muppet]

It’s not as if QF had a gun to their head demanding they lease slots to BA.
It actually is their fault, they were the idiots that gave up the slots

I can only assume QF is making more money leasing the slots than flying planes. Quite sure QF would love to just sell points and wine and never operate an aircraft, if it could.

 

[SeaWolf]

Also, there are other options to fly to London, a lot of airlines (SQ, QR, EK, DL) fly into Gatwick as well and BA has a wide range of flights across Europe from Gatwick for QF to connect to.

 

[justinbrett]

As was also mentioned earlier, didn’t QF have more than 4 slots at one time?
Do you know what happy to them at at what timeframe?

They went from 2 to 4 in 2004 after buying them from Flybee. Don’t know before that.

Sorry to be a pedant, but unless the terms of the lease allow for it to be broken early, then it'll be taken back at the end of the lease. That's not necessarily the same as when you need it.

Write a better lease then. Sunrise has been in the works for longer than any lease should have been.

 

[RichardMEL]

I seem to recall, and it would make sense, that slots would be leased on the basis of the IATA seasons ie basically six monthly increments, probably renegoiated on a yearly basis (given forward planning etc) and obviously situations like this where QF have informed BA tgeir intent to take back the leases from saw NW25 (ie say 29oct25) or possibly now NS26(ie end March 26) which raises a side issue for QF - with the delays to sunrise and other issues, the initially flagged late 25 start clearly won't happen... so what of the slots? I suppose BA could keep them as a short term extension. Iirc from one of those airport shows about LHR, if the slots are not used, they lose them. Not a big issue as I am sure QF could find a willing user for sux months (most likely BA still).

 

[jase05]

Is Gatwick or even Stansted viable options for QF going forward or have they flat out said no?
I think that would be plenty of Australians that would possibly prefer not to fly into LHR

 

[RichardMEL]

Is Gatwick or even Stansted viable options for QF going forward or have they flat out said no?
I think that would be plenty of Australians that would possibly prefer not to fly into LHR

STN.. for easy connections to... jetstarUK aka EasyJet?! Nope. Can't see it.

Even LGW seens a stretch. QF has a small enough presence in London as is. EK and those few others can seeve both but I can't see QF splitting from LHR to another London airport.

Tokyo is confusing enough as is imo.

 

[justinbrett]

I don’t think LGW is the antidote for those complaining about LHR

 

[Cognac]

Is Gatwick or even Stansted viable options for QF going forward or have they flat out said no?
I think that would be plenty of Australians that would possibly prefer not to fly into LHR

Given they're building a new F Lounge at LHR I highly doubt there'll be a switch any time soon.

I think something that people should also remember is that Qantas is an Australian airline, not a Sydney/Melbourne to London shuttle service. Is there a lot of travel between Australia and the UK? Sure, but there's a whole range of destinations that are a lot closer.

It makes sense for airlines in the middle (ME3, SQ, etc) to serve both ends of that equation. But it's a bit more difficult for the guys at the extremities. And unfortunately for Australia, with the exception of new Zealand, we are an extremity for pretty much everyone. No one travels via Australia for convenience. Everyone is complaining about how many slots Qantas has at LHR, but how many European operators have flights to and from Australian ports?

 

[jase05]

I don’t think LGW is the antidote for those complaining about LHR

Of course not and it probably wouldn’t appeal to me either but if slots are tight and QF wants to increase flights to the UK I guess you have to look at all the options. Maybe they are content with 4 slots going forward and concentrate on some other European ports.

 

[Quickstatus]

Gatwick

There was a recent Qantas A380 who went there with some exclusive passengers.

I think something that people should also remember is that Qantas is an Australian airline

While Paul Keating might say we are actually part of Asia, AU still has a significant connection with UK.

not a Sydney/Melbourne to London shuttle service.

Given that their seat count has just about halved over the years it appears to be so. It is interesting though that the airline spins the QF9/10 as a high yielding route but it has now cut the East Coast to LHR routes by half.

No one travels via Australia for convenience.

Some would say that East coast via "Australia" (PER) to LHR is similar.

 

[RSVKanga]

When Sunrise services commence, it’s not out of the question for QF to fly A350s and 787s into CDG and AMS, and utilise AF/KLM codeshare connections instead of BA. Apart from BA being partly owned by QF’s enemy, AF/KLM offer an arguably better short haul experience, and there is already an existing QF-AF/KLM partnership that can be expanded - not something totally new. Also will mean CDG and AMS will become key QF metal ports alongside LHR which will be treated as a destination rather than transit.

In fact they should start trialling this sooner rather than later as QF’s flights to Paris starting in July. QF33/34 could and should be the first of many QF routes to AF/KLM ports.

This can be in addition to or a replacement to the EK partnership when it expires and QF begins nonstops. It would be good to have both partnerships though.

 

[Quickstatus]

I can't see QF flying into AMS. FRA direct maybe (as it used to operate a 747 there). The long thin routes 787/A350 require a high business passenger component.

HEL would be a better option in my view than AMS.

 

[jase05]

AF/KLM offer an arguably better short haul experience,

Not in my recent experience.
BA were exceptional on all my Euro flights and I’m normally a critic of their product. Was disappointed with AF

 

[Cloud9]

I can't see QF flying into AMS. FRA direct maybe (as it used to operate a 747 there). The long thin routes 787/A350 require a high business passenger component.

HEL would be a better option in my view than AMS.

In terms of passengers heading onwards and outwards, AMS does have the advantage of the train network. I would certainly be game for a MEL - AMS flight if it meant I could touch down and head to Brussels/Cologne/Copenhagen nice and easily by train.

Edited to add: not that I hate Frankfurt. I just can't see much point flying into what is basically a gold depository with a runway and little else, when Amsterdam is always good for a museum trek.