Why can’t QF codeshare with AA on transatlantic flights to cater for the West AUS <> East USA market?

[Cognac]

Sounds good on paper, but when you crunch the numbers it's not really worth it.

PER-LHR-BOS is 1:39 quicker than PER-SYD-LAX-BOS with current schedules (both QF/AA); however the return is quicker BOS-DFW-MEL-PER by 0:54.

So the return journey is saving you about 45 minutes total going via LHR instead of SYD/MEL. And the latter option gives you many more options to airports without transatlantic service, and more flexibility in the case of disruptions. Cities west of BOS will start to favour via SYD/MEL more as you go further west, with LAX clearly quicker via SYD/MEL.

And finally this is all possible without codeshare. You can book this right now on the QF website:

View attachment 390206

This is it. US east coast is as far away as you can get from Perth (somewhere in Florida is the actual opposite point of the globe if I recall correctly). West of that point is just ocean until you get Europe/Africa. East of that point, however, is the entirety of the US market. And QF serves so much of that already via connections on the west coast that they can fly directly into as well.

When filling out connections from LAX they can get PAX from BNE, SYD, and MEL in one hit. Any connections onwards from European destinations are only going to be filling out from Perth. And if that's spread over three (or four, or five, if other ports are added in), it creates a bigger network of support from Qantas' perspective. And then the options from DFW as well. And you're already one-stop on QF metal to JFK (which becomes more important again if the PER-AKL route does end up on the calendar).

@RSVKanga - I'm not saying it's not possible, but JVs that serve all of Australia's three biggest cities, rather than only Australia's fourth biggest city, just make a lot more sense.

 

[RSVKanga]

@RSVKanga - I'm not saying it's not possible, but JVs that serve all of Australia's three biggest cities, rather than only Australia's fourth biggest city, just make a lot more sense.

I certainly wasn’t suggesting any changes be made to the existing trans-Pacific QF-AA JV. It works very well for SYD, MEL and BNE passengers. I was suggesting an expansion to this JV to cater for WA as well with QF-AA codeshare connections in LHR/CDG/FCO in addition to the QF-AA codeshare connections that the east coast Australian cities can access in one stop in LAX/DFW. This would mean the JV flights would fly across the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific oceans and serve all of Australia’s big four cities.

 

[justinbrett]

I certainly wasn’t suggesting any changes be made to the existing trans-Pacific QF-AA JV. It works very well for SYD, MEL and BNE passengers. I was suggesting an expansion to this JV to cater for WA as well with QF-AA codeshare connections in LHR/CDG/FCO. This would mean the JV flights would fly across the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific oceans and serve all of Australia’s big four cities.

I’m not sure that’s even legally possible due to the AA/BA JV. It would also mean QF having to give some of the PER-LHR profits to AA.

It would be a complete mess. Just do it without the codeshares.

 

[RSVKanga]

It would also mean QF having to give some of the PER-LHR profits to AA.

A small amount yes, and that amount depends on how many people book the PER-LHR on a AA ticket. And wouldn’t that mean AA giving a small portion of profits on its lucrative transatlantic routes to QF as well? (Depending on how many people book the flights on a QF ticket)?

Of course this whole thing on profit sharing gets removed if it’s just normal codeshares rather than a JV on those routes.

I’m not sure that’s even legally possible due to the AA/BA JV.

This isn’t about travel solely between the US and UK; this is travel between the east US and Western Australia via the UK, France and Italy. Not sure how BA would be affected in a negative manner.

If it really does ‘legally’ affect the JV with BA then I think just a normal codeshare rather than a JV on those routes would suit well.

 

[justinbrett]

A small amount yes, and that amount depends on how many people book the PER-LHR on a AA ticket. And wouldn’t that mean AA giving a small portion of profits on its lucrative transatlantic routes to QF as well? (Depending on how many people book the flights on a QF ticket)?

Of course this whole thing on profit sharing gets removed if it’s just normal codeshares rather than a JV on those routes.


This isn’t about travel solely between the US and UK; this is travel between the east US and Western Australia via the UK, France and Italy. Not sure how BA would be affected in a negative manner.

If it really does ‘legally’ affect the JV with BA then I think just a normal codeshare rather than a JV on those routes would suit well.

You haven't made a case for why codeshares are required. Why not just sell the flight with an AA code?

It's not about SCs and points. There's effectively no difference between the QF and AA earn rates on transatlantic - except if you're on expensive fares on QF you might get a couple more (eg J on AA is 100 for BOS-LHR, Discount J on QF is also 100, higher fares are 105/115). Same for QF is 25/35/50 for Y (Discount/Normal/Flex), AA is 25/25/50. Premium and First are the same.

The BA/AA JV is messy because that is also metal neutral, so they would have to split of any seats sold to QF because BA doesn't get a share of that, I just don't even think that's possible.

It wasn't that long ago before the QF/AA deal was signed, many connections were on AA codes. The world kept spinning. At least now the AA SC tax has been removed and is pretty much back to QF levels.

 

[RSVKanga]

Why not just sell the flight with an AA code?

Again it would be great if they did even that as a start. Looking at the QF website they sell only 1-2 of the 17 routes that AA fly from CDG, LHR and FCO to east US destinations (That's LHR/CDG/FCO <> JFK/PHL/ORD/MIA/CLT/BOS/RDU). I'm not sure if it's due to the timings of QF9/33/5 and their return flights, but I think QF simply weren't bothered. They should at least start by loading those connections in (on an AA code) as you have suggested and advertising this option to the market and see if it's popular before levelling it up to a codeshare.

 

[justinbrett]

Again it would be great if they did even that as a start. Looking at the QF website they sell only 1-2 of the 17 routes that AA fly from CDG, LHR and FCO to east US destinations (That's LHR/CDG/FCO <> JFK/PHL/ORD/MIA/CLT/BOS/RDU). I'm not sure if it's due to the timings of QF9/33/5 and their return flights, but I think QF simply weren't bothered. They should at least start by loading those connections in (on an AA code) as you have suggested and advertising this option to the market and see if it's popular before levelling it up to a codeshare.

I would imagine QF would prefer pax book via SYD/MEL.

Why take seats off a lucrative 787 service when they can send you via a much higher capacity trans paciifc and any number of domestic connections on either side.

For the marginal time saving, if any, there’s also a much higher risk of misconnection so you might get a 24 hour stop in LHR.

 

[RichardMEL]

I pulled fare routing rules for QF PER-BOS

Discounted J:

PUBLISHED RTG PER-BOS/QF8110/TAR-TPRG EF-29MAY24 DIS-INDEF

/VIA THE PACIFIC/
MAP CONSTRUCTED LEFT TO RIGHT AND RIGHT TO LEFT
1. PER-SYD/MEL-DFW-QF/AS/AA-BOS
2. PER-SYD/MEL/BNE-SFO/LAX-QF/AS/AA-BOS

But the most expensive J ie fully flex, permits EH routing

PUBLISHED RTG PER-BOS/QF1 /TAR-TARG EF-24OCT23 DIS-INDEF

/VIA THE ATLANTIC/
MAP CONSTRUCTED LEFT TO RIGHT AND RIGHT TO LEFT
1. PER-LON-BA/AA-BOS
.

So QF's pref is definitely to route pax via SYD/MEL/BNE as discussed.

Not to mention that if QF is putting pax on PER-LHR, the pref is for pax connecting to UK/europe destinations.

You want via LON? Pay Up!

Also that's not entertaining the notion of connections in CDG or FCO, but that is from last year - it may or may not be updated, though this kind of fare wouldn't upset QF at all in terms of ither pax on PER-LHR. Bigly yields.

It also makes sense that QF/AA JV fncludes transpac flights, so ot is in QF's interest to route pax that way.

Of course, this is all ignoring RTW fare products, like a DONEx type, which probably make more sense both economically and for routings - but of course imply at least one stop in Europe/UK.

Again, codeshares don't really add much to the equation for all the reasons discussed imo.

 

[wandering_fred]

If flying in economy exPER to the eastern USA, the OneWorld LONE4 explorer tickets start to become price competitive when a couple of USA additional stops are needed. And typically L fare class has better earning than Q N or O
Things learned while wandering
Fred

 

[Quickstatus]

Why codeshare at all?. There is no need IMO.

Its just a one stop via DOH on QR
Can even do a 2 stop via HKG and CX

I'm sure there are others non QF solutions

Addit:
Once in the US, I think it's better not to codeshare for any domestic flights for a variety of reasons - the main one is flexibility. At a minimum I don't think there is a benefit once in the US.

 

[RSVKanga]

Why codeshare at all?. There is no need IMO.

Its just a one stop via DOH on QR
Can even do a 2 stop via HKG and CX

I'm sure there are others non QF solutions

I think I made it quite clear in post #1 that ME airlines have a huge advantage in offering seamless one stop connections from Perth to the eastern USA. Why restate my point?

 

[Quickstatus]

A. Why restate my point?

Reinforcing the point that codeshare are unnecessary in answer to your thread question .....

 

[RSVKanga]

Once in the US, I think it's better not to codeshare for any domestic flights for a variety of reasons - the main one is flexibility. At a minimum I don't think there is a benefit once in the US.

Too bad. It’s already happening with QF codes on 100+ US domestic routes operated by AA. If you oppose QF’s current commercial interests so much then I think there are more appropriate threads to express such views and agendas.

 

[RichardMEL]

Correct me uf I'm wrong here but iirc the QF/EK alliance specifically excludes the US (alibg with some other places) so while QF can and does code to DXB, they won't cide further, and of course zero chance with QR.

I think the exclusion is probably to protect QF's transpac business (plus of course from the east coast, going via DXB is the absolute long way...

Of course, I agree that codeshares beyond eilurope to the US don't make a lot of sense

 

[justinbrett]

Too bad. It’s already happening with QF codes on 100+ US domestic routes operated by AA. If you oppose QF’s current commercial interests so much then I think there are more appropriate threads to express such views and agendas.

No, you haven't made a single valid argument of why codeshares are needed.

 

[RSVKanga]

No, you haven't made a single valid argument of why codeshares are needed.

Well, at least have seamless connections from QF to AA in CDG/LHR/FCO (on an AA code) loaded on the QF website. But even that isn’t happening. I think it could allow Qantas to dramatically grow or even dominate the market between Perth and the eastern USA.

It’s an easy and simple solution that doesn’t require any additional aircraft or routes and gives the ME carriers a run for their money.

 

[elanshin]

Well, at least have seamless connections from QF to AA in CDG/LHR/FCO (on an AA code) loaded on the QF website. But even that isn’t happening. I think it could allow Qantas to dramatically grow or even dominate the market between Perth and the eastern USA.

It’s an easy and simple solution that doesn’t require any additional aircraft or routes and gives the ME carriers a run for their money.

Why is it not a seamless connection without the codeshare. It's already on one PNR if you buy a QF/AA/BA etc ticket. It already shows up on the app as one journey, you're probably doing the same physical things on the ground.

The only thing that becomes different is any SC earnings and points. Now granted if you want to fly that direction from PER, you'd likely need a travel agent to set up the itinerary, but that's more on QF trying to route their customers through the east coast.

 

[dajop]

. I think it could allow Qantas to dramatically grow or even dominate the market between Perth and the eastern USA.

But why? They have stated the PER-LHR route is already one of their most profitable, carrying traffic to US east coast is going to potentially dilute the current traffic. I can’t see how they would “dominate the market” unless they actually added extra services from PER which in turn could dilute profitability.

 

[RSVKanga]

They have stated the PER-LHR route is already one of their most profitable, carrying traffic to US east coast is going to potentially dilute the current traffic.

I’m not sure why everyone’s centred only on PER-LHR. They’ll start flying year round to Paris very soon and fly seasonal to Rome. While I hope that PER-CDG is as profitable as PER-LHR, I doubt it would be. Empty seats can be filled by PER passengers flying to CDG and connecting to AA there. In addition to LHR and FCO.

 

[elanshin]

Also i just had another couple of things.

Firstly there's little demand for such a journey today. Unless you have very specific reasons to go to the US, its hella expensive right now for aussies to visit (I'm planning a trip and i can already see my cost excluding flights being 5x than my similar length asia trip).

QF hasn't even launched most of their EU flights yet. Whilst they forecast great things for them, it could be that LHR does great and FCO/CDG flop. I'm pretty sure QF would need to get the routes up, have them become a staple before even entertaining the idea.

Finally whats in it for AA? US tourism doesn't know PER exists. It's all east coast of Australia and that's services Transpacific. If you're a perthite going to US, you may consider going to East coast, but then happily end up in the West coast before jetting home Transpacific.

You'd literally be talking about the niche of the niche given there's almost no corporate demand between PER and East coast US.

Oh and if you're doing such a journey, you're probably FAR better off using the OW xONE product.