Views on Cabotage

[dfcatch]

I would not have an issue with an airline flying SIN-CNS-SYD as long as all it did in CNS was drop-off passengers. But even if it did pick up passengers in CNS I do not think that would be a big deal.

But if say the question was something like "Can Singapore Airlines fly CNS-SYD-ADL or any other route that is not part of an international itinerary?" then my answer would be no.

Sure Qantas may have neglected some routes but the answer is not to allow overseas carriers to setup domestic services.

Why couldn't SQ operate SIN-CNS-SYD and carry domestic pax on the internal route? It would increase bums on seats into a port like CNS which is heavily dependent on those seats. If all SQ can do is drop pax but not carry any domestic ones, then they incur 2 sets of landing fees but can't offset them with domestic pax.
Therefore SQ won't bother with landing in CNS at all.

But no I wouldn't suggest that SQ should operate domestic routes with no connection to the INT flight, nor would I suggest that a route like SYD-ADL should be permitted.

EDIT: I re-read your post. We're saying the same thing.

 

[docjames]

Agree a domestic leg connecting to an international flight would be a good way to open up service to "secondary" international ports and allow domestic traffic to be carried on the local leg too.

Eg. CGK-DRW-MEL, NRT-CNS-SYD
SIN-ADL-MEL, etc

 

[JohnK]

Why couldn't SQ operate SIN-CNS-SYD and carry domestic pax on the internal route? It would increase bums on seats into a port like CNS which is heavily dependent on those seats. If all SQ can do is drop pax but not carry any domestic ones, then they incur 2 sets of landing fees but can't offset them with domestic pax.
Therefore SQ won't bother with landing in CNS at all.

My reasoning behind that comment was I think allowing overseas airlines to do these tag flights may not necessarily increase passengers on the route but take away existing passengers which leads to domestic schedules reduced further not competition.

 

[dfcatch]

My reasoning behind that comment was I think allowing overseas airlines to do these tag flights may not necessarily increase passengers on the route but take away existing passengers which leads to domestic schedules reduced further not competition.

And this is a good point.

The reason for my thread was to try and flesh out these kinds of issues.....

The challenge in a port like CNS is to increase INT pax. (Without denting DOM demand)

 

[Ikara]

Personally I like my cabotage lightly fried with a little bit of bacon and sesame seed. Bloody beautiful.

JB

 

[dajop]

And this is a good point.

The reason for my thread was to try and flesh out these kinds of issues.....

The challenge in a port like CNS is to increase INT pax. (Without denting DOM demand)

Probably the best way of looking what may or may not happen is, for a moment, to consider the parallels to Trans Tasman. So you get the likes of DXB-SYD-CHC, DXB-MEL-AKL, TPE-BNE-AKL, SCL-AKL-SYD etc ... what did that do for TT competition? One thing of note, is that exception of SYD-CHC all of these just involve AKL. So if domestic cabotage were allowed would the regional ports be of any interest to foreign airlines, or would it just end up being routes like DOH-PER-SYD , CAN-CNS-MEL etc...