Virgin Australia Financials 2019/20

[Nobleoz]

Anyone heard what options will be available for MEL-LHR.......other than via LAX with its 12 hour lay-over?

 

[Bagpuss]

Anyone heard what options will be available for MEL-LHR.......other than via LAX with its 12 hour lay-over?

Virgin - MEL - SYD - HKG - LHR
Singapore - MEL - SIN - LHR
Ethhda - MEL - AUH - LHR

Though with the ANA partnership, going via Japan may become an option to.

 

[Nobleoz]

Virgin - MEL - SYD - HKG - LHR
Singapore - MEL - SIN - LHR
Ethhda - MEL - AUH - LHR

Though with the ANA partnership, going via Japan may become an option to.

Surely SYD is impossible for a connection from MEL? Anyway, I certainly would not be interested in flying to SYD & going from the domestic terminal to international.

 

[dajop]

Virgin - MEL - SYD - HKG - LHR

Trouble with VS/VA tie up in HKG is connections time enroute to LHR, with 7:20 layover between VA and VS. Coming back it is much better, 2:20.

Doing MEL-SYD-HKG-LHR (on northern winter schedule) means leaving MEL at 7am, arriving in LHR at 4:50am, almost 33 hrs (compared to say QF9, which leaves MEL around 5pm and arrives at almost the same time).

 

[Jacques Vert]

Trouble with VS/VA tie up in HKG is connections time enroute to LHR, with 7:20 layover between VA and VS. Coming back it is much better, 2:20.

Time for a little shopping at Tung Chung/Citigate?

 

[pauly7]

Trouble with VS/VA tie up in HKG is connections time enroute to LHR, with 7:20 layover between VA and VS. Coming back it is much better, 2:20.

Doing MEL-SYD-HKG-LHR (on northern winter schedule) means leaving MEL at 7am, arriving in LHR at 4:50am, almost 33 hrs (compared to say QF9, which leaves MEL around 5pm and arrives at almost the same time).

Which simply means VA will pick up zero corporate travel with that connection mentioned.

 

[eastwest101]

Which simply means VA will pick up zero corporate travel with that connection mentioned.

Thats probably a pretty good point often overlooked. For Virgin to capture the corporate market with big international clients and Australian based multinationals (think about Rio Tinto, BHP, 4 major banks, Macquarie Bank, Wesfarmers, Telstra etc) I reckon at a minimum - they need to offer sensible international timings and frequencies and partners to the following destinations:

LHR - yes maybe via EY and/or SQ but as you outlined the VS connections are stupid in one direction.
LAX and or SFO - covered well by DL and VAi metal
NRT or HND - until now a yawning gap in VA's route network codeshare with ANA will improve things
SIN - covered well by SQ anyway so probably not a priority
HKG - current democracy protests have interfered with things so the VA entry timing was unfortunate and too late
CAN and PVG - probably not worth worrying about because covered so well by Chinese carriers but important to get a code share and part of the action
BLR - largest IT industry centre of the largest english speaking economy in the world - why is this ignored?

If I were sitting in the Rio Tinto head office and needed travel solutions between the London and Melbourne head offices then I am the sort of high profit margin client that VA would love to steal off Qantas, but at the moment Virgin is just not in the ball park of sensible contenders in at least one direction.

I realize corporate travel is mostly focused on domestic but if you are choosing a domestic airline partner as your preferred carrier for your staff - and they do have to go overseas - what advantages can VA offer over the incumbent QF?

 

[Melburnian1]

Thats probably a pretty good point often overlooked. For Virgin to capture the corporate market with big international clients and Australian based multinationals (think about Rio Tinto, BHP, 4 major banks, Macquarie Bank, Wesfarmers, Telstra etc) I reckon at a minimum - they need to offer sensible international timings and frequencies and partners to the following destinations:

BLR - largest IT industry centre of the largest english speaking economy in the world - why is this ignored?...I realize corporate travel is mostly focused on domestic but if you are choosing a domestic airline partner as your preferred carrier for your staff - and they do have to go overseas - what advantages can VA offer over the incumbent QF?

All valid points, but MNL could be added to the list. No VA nonstops, and only feasible options with it are via HKG (and then competitors CX or PR, the latter non-aligned) or via SIN on SQ, both of which add hours to the journey to an increasingly important business destination (so many business process outsourcing and call centre staff, as well as IT contractors) to which QF has publicly said patronage has risen, as well as a nation in Philippines that has a fast growing tourism sector.

 

[Obzerva]

Knowing that the VA connection to LHR isn’t great, there is a simple solution that could be implemented re the long connection in HKG but it would take SQ or EY to be on board with it.

a long time ago, back when VA code sharing on both was in its infancy, you could actually book VA flight numbers return but have them operated one way by SQ and one way by EY, that disappeared over 5 years ago now, maybe 6. Now is either all VA operated by one or the other.

perhaps the solution, or at least part of it, without changing anything operationally would be for the ability to book VA flight numbers but be operated by SQ or EY on the outbound ex Aus and inbound operated by VS/VA.
It doesn’t mean SQ and EY have to play nicely with each other, but they could play nicely with VA.
Eg SYD-AUH/SIN-LHR
LHR-HKG-SYD

 

[toowongman]

BLR - largest IT industry centre of the largest english speaking economy in the world - why is this ignored?

QF ran a tag flight from SIN to Mumbai or somewhere in India a few years ago. Rumour has it that the reason for cancellation was too many staff calling sick for that flight. Cultural difference and all that. I think most airlines shove India in the "too hard" basket for that reason.

 

[HS-TQE]

QF ran a tag flight from SIN to Mumbai or somewhere in India a few years ago. Rumour has it that the reason for cancellation was too many staff calling sick for that flight. Cultural difference and all that. I think most airlines shove India in the "too hard" basket for that reason.

There is also the wide belief that India is largely a "low yielding" 'price sensitive' VFR market with minimal business demand to subsidise the budget travellers, hence the lower number of full fare carriers able to make long haul to/from Indian cities work.

Thailand and the Philippines is of the same boat (largely believed to be mostly low yielding), hence only the home carriers (with lower operating costs) service the AU market.

Saying that, even JQ doesn't seem to be that willing to give India a go considering an LCC suits the AU-India market alongside the Full Service incumbent: Air India.

 

[Melburnian1]

...Thailand and the Philippines is of the same boat (largely believed to be mostly low yielding), hence only the home carriers (with lower operating costs) service the AU market...

I may have missed something, but QF runs daily SYD - MNL (and has over the years increased its frequency, carrying many business travellers) while QF subsidiary 3K also operates there. Thailand is served by QF and JQ, so not just 'home carriers' either nonstop to or from Oz.

 

[AIRwin]

To add to @Melburnian1 , there are also LCCs from Thailand and the Philippines servicing BNE/MEL/SYD and not just "home carriers"...

 

[dajop]

BLR - largest IT industry centre of the largest english speaking economy in the world - why is this ignored?

I think most airlines shove India in the "too hard" basket for that reason.

Coupled with low yields, I wonder if India is in the "too hard" basket, not for that reason, but because the distance doesn't suit a single aircraft operation.

If you look at MEL-BLR, it's about 750 miles less than MEL-DEL, so about 3 hrs less travel time overall on return trip basis. MEL-DEL-MEL takes 25 hrs, so about 22 hrs return trip for MEL-BLR-MEL, which is just too tight for turnaround or a single aircraft operation. SYD is of course 230miles further from BLR than MEL, so that means 23 hrs of flying for return trip. (or even compare to MEL-CMB service, where the schedule allows 3:20 for turn arounds, it is almost 400 miles closer than BLR, so that's about 1:40 extra flying).

 

[eastwest101]

Coupled with low yields, I wonder if India is in the "too hard" basket, not for that reason, but because the distance doesn't suit a single aircraft operation.

If you look at MEL-BLR, it's about 750 miles less than MEL-DEL, so about 3 hrs less travel time overall on return trip basis. MEL-DEL-MEL takes 25 hrs, so about 22 hrs return trip for MEL-BLR-MEL, which is just too tight for turnaround or a single aircraft operation. SYD is of course 230miles further from BLR than MEL, so that means 23 hrs of flying for return trip. (or even compare to MEL-CMB service, where the schedule allows 3:20 for turn arounds, it is almost 400 miles closer than BLR, so that's about 1:40 extra flying).

Thats a really good point - its a very awkward sector length that you can't really cover with one aircraft - as you say - only one minor tech hiccup away from running into curfews and other scheduling problems.

 

[Melburnian1]

Thats a really good point - its a very awkward sector length that you can't really cover with one aircraft - as you say - only one minor tech hiccup away from running into curfews and other scheduling problems.

QFi at one stage operated a SIN - India 'shuttle' but that was different times. Eventually it was withdrawn.

 

[HS-TQE]

QFi at one stage operated a SIN - India 'shuttle' but that was different times. Eventually it was withdrawn.

It was an extension of "QF51/52" ex-BNE when it operated, with a change of gauge at SIN at one point.

Originally it was a A332/A333 for both sectors, but the BNE-SIN sector was up-gauged to a 744 at one point during that period, with the A332/A333 (coming from one of the other AU ports) still operating the SIN-BOM sector

 

[dajop]

It was an extension of "QF51/52" ex-BNE when it operated, with a change of gauge at SIN at one point.

Originally it was a A332/A333 for both sectors, but the BNE-SIN sector was up-gauged to a 744 at one point during that period, with the A332/A333 (coming from one of the other AU ports) still operating the SIN-BOM sector

At that time, which was in the period immediately before the flight was discontinued, the flight number came from BNE but the actual aircraft came from ADL. When QF shifted their LHR transit point to DXB, the ADL-SIN and SIN-BOM flights (and PER-SIN flights as well) were discontinued. I suspect it had little to do with "sickies" more the wholesale realignment of QFi.

 

[jase05]

Which simply means VA will pick up zero corporate travel with that connection mentioned.

There was some talk awhile back that once VS and VA tightened up their partnership that some friendlier connection times may happen down the track. With the arrangement being formally approved in the last week hopefully we may see some changes in the future. Wonder when/if VS reward seats will show up on VA’s search engine.

 

[jakeseven7]

Trouble with VS/VA tie up in HKG is connections time enroute to LHR, with 7:20 layover between VA and VS.

Don't worry - their new advertising campaign with Wiggy will solve silly little inconveniences like 7 hour layovers