BITRE August 2019 international passenger statistics

[Melburnian1]

While passengers using international airlines rose 2.9 per cent in August 2019 compared with August 2018 - a better performance than in July - this rise has some 'devil in the detail.'

Total QF passengers on the Oz - HKG routes dropped by 11.3 per cent, or about 6500 fewer who used it either to or from. VA's rose 31.1 per cent (as a year ago it was not operating SYD - HKG and v.v.) while CX's inexplicably rose 3.2 per cent, not what I'd have expected given the ongoing demonstrations.

CA had a 25 per cent drop in total passenger numbers due to the effect of withdrawing some flights. Surprisingly, CZ's total passenger traffic on its Oz routes declined 12.6 per cent. MU was however up 20.5 per cent while far smaller GS dropped 46.3 per cent. 3U was up 21.9 per cent though while the rise for HU was 9.2 per cent. JD rose a huge 57.2 per cent but it is a small volume carrier to and from our nation. MF was up 24.2 per cent.

BA, which only operates a daily SIN - SYD - SIN flight had an amazing 40.2 per cent rise in passengers carried - an additional 1700 so roughly 30 more per day each way.

CI had a very healthy 19.2 per cent rise. On the MNL routes, 5J's number of passengers rose 31.2 per cent due to commencing a thrice weekly to and from MEL while PR placed its A333 again on the SYD route (ending A321neo use) so overall its numbers rose 21.6 per cent.

EK declined 8.1 per cent to and from DXB, 7.4 per cent on New Zealand and 6 per cent for SIN, while due to ceasing SYD - BKK the decline there was recorded as 100 per cent. Other sites have run articles suggesting the gloss has come off EK, but it remains a major carrier. Ek's overall market share dropped from 7.9 per cent in August 2018 to 6.9 per cent in August 2019, quite a large decrease.

DZ not just carries tiny passenger numbers on its DRW - SZX flights but also abysmal load factors of around 28 per cent each way in August 2019. There's no guarantee however that one would have three Y seats to oneself as passengers might occupy every window seat.

XJ, a relatively recent entrant to BNE (only) had low load factors averaging about 47 per cent while long established PX with its elderly fleet to and from POM had load factors of about 55 per cent, way below the median for August. I have looked at using PX for Asian travel but its fares ex OZ seem expensive.

ON had just 33.5 per cent of its seats filled in each direction. Some other 'island' airlines such as IE and O were also below the industry median seat occupancy for August 2019.

Having started its BNE flights, BI shot up 43.2 per cent as it now serves two destinations in Oz not just MEL.

MEL and PER (the airports) performed poorly in August 2019 with overall passenger numbers rising just 0.5 per cent, below (Victorian) population growth of about 1.7 per cent. SYD figures increased 1.6 per cent and BNE 6.2 per cent, while ADL and DRW rose more (respectively 13.3 and 21.2 per cent), though from small bases. OOL continued to decline, reducing throughput of we 'cattle' by 9.2 per cent.

EY's load factors were higher than competitors EK and QR, although this does not tell us anything about all important yields ($$) per available seat.

https://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/files/International_airline_activity_1908.pdf

 

[jase05]

I’m wondering if CX’s increase is due to people still using what is a very good airline and airport to onwards destinations. There would be plenty who might be put off by staying in HKG with the current situation but would have no issue transiting through. I haven’t paid a lot of attention but has CX lowered their prices at all recently to win some business?

 

[Melburnian1]

. ...I haven’t paid a lot of attention but has CX lowered their prices at all recently to win some business?

It has had one or two sales I've seen from its email feed but fares don't seem anywhere near as cheap as CA, PR and so on when latter two have sales.

 

[dajop]

MEL and PER (the airports) performed poorly in August 2019 with overall passenger numbers rising just 0.5 per cent, below (Victorian) population growth of about 1.7 per cent.

Once again, it won't be until Jan 2020 until you get an accurate comparison of the performance of MEL vs same month in prior year. As you know, in August 2018, Air Asia flew to MEL, whereas since early December it has flown to AVV. If you look at the collective airports serving Melbourne, the growth is 4.2% (MEL 2018 vs MEL+AVV 2019). If you are comparing it to Victorian population growth, you need to compare both airports, not MEL in isolation.

 

[kelvedon]

Any info to be gleaned on QF PER- LHR ?

 

[Melburnian1]

Any info to be gleaned on QF PER- LHR ?

Since QF is the sole operator on this sector, indeed there is.

In August 2019, 31 flights operated each way. With (in theory, though maybe not in practice) 236 seats available on each flight, this gives total seat capacity for the month in each direction of 7316.

Inbound, 5407 seats were occupied by paying passengers while outbound a remarkably similar number of 5418 'posteriors' had a seat.

This gives seat occupancy of around 73.9 per cent, well below what CEO Alan Joyce claims is (IIRC) 95 per cent for the premium classes of J (42 seats) and W (28 seats) and 92 per cent for whY (166 seats).

Dividing the number of monthly passengers by 31 gives a median of around 175 on each flight, meaning a typical 61 seats not booked by revenue passengers.

In practice, I gather that not only may some seats be reserved for crew but the aircraft does not operate with a full complement of passengers in the remaining seats due to the very long sector length and consequent close attention to the aircraft weight. Westbound, this is also so for QF8 (DFW- SYD).

If an AFFer could confirm on QF9/QF10 PER - LHR - PER how many seats are reserved for crew and how many on top of that are never occupied, and in which class(es), that would be interesting.

One of our aviators made the perceptive and interesting comment that 'the 9' and 'the 10' had been 'lucky' not to yet have to divert to another en route airfield. Perhaps the forthcoming UK winter will be another test of this.

 

[dajop]

Since QF is the sole operator on this sector, indeed there is.

In August 2019, 31 flights operated each way. With (in theory, though maybe not in practice) 236 seats available on each flight, this gives total seat capacity for the month in each direction of 7316.

Inbound, 5407 seats were occupied by paying passengers while outbound a remarkably similar number of 5418 'posteriors' had a seat.

This gives seat occupancy of around 73.9 per cent, well below what CEO Alan Joyce claims is (IIRC) 95 per cent for the premium classes of J (42 seats) and W (28 seats) and 92 per cent for whY (166 seats).

Melburnian, the thing missing in your analysis is Melbourne originating/final destination passengers. They won't be included in the Perth to London statistics, but in Melbourne to London statistics (as the only flight from MEL to LHR on single flight number is QF9).

The totals are 5407+1421 =6828 inbound and 5418 + 1542 = 6960 outbound, which gives much more respectable loadings of 93.3% and 95.1% on the long sector between PER & LHR.

 

[milehighclub]

You need to add the passengers that also fly MEL-LHR as they are listed separately, which would see the load factor increase to spot on 95%

 

[Melburnian1]

Melburnian, the thing missing in your analysis is Melbourne originating/final destination passengers. They won't be included in the Perth to London statistics, but in Melbourne to London statistics (as the only flight from MEL to LHR on single flight number is QF9).

The totals are 5407+1421 =6828 inbound and 5418 + 1542 = 6960 outbound, which gives much more respectable loadings of 93.3% and 95.1% on the long sector between PER & LHR.

Interesting that the vast majority of passengers originate from other than Melbourne. This is not what one may have predicted, as most SYD - LHR and v.v. travellers would opt for 'the 1' and 'the 2' if flying on QF, and those to/from BNE might prefer to change in SIN rather than PER.

Introduction of QF9/QF10 via PER rather than the previous via DXB meant QF cut its number of available seats to/from LHR each day by 25 per cent (2 x A388s previously: 1 x A388/1 x B789 now) so any analysis as to whether the PER - LHR route is a 'success' has to bear this in mind. If QF had decided to operate a second daily B789 MEL - PER - LHR and return, that would be a truer comparison. Like any airline, QF may measure 'success' from investors' point of view: does the route (after all direct and attributable indirect costs) return an acceptable percentage on invested capital? However, routinely airlines also like to boast where they can about rising passenger numbers or high seat occupancies (neither of which always means an operation is profitable at all, or to the degree that the owners want).

Are the remaining (empty) seats on 'the 9' and 'the 10' available for booking but no one has, or as I asked above reserved for various staff and hence 'blocked'?

 

[Spongbob]

The increase in BA passengers carried on the SYD-SIN flights is interesting.
BA had sale in early 2019 which made their flights cost competitive compared with QF and others.
But there might be other reasons.

 

[jase05]

I may be blind but I couldn’t see the figures on the OD flights ADL-DPS that commenced this year. Plenty of work colleagues and friends have flown with them and reckons it is a big improvement on JQ comfort and service wise. Just wondering if they are eating into JQ’s market significantly on this route or not?

 

[dajop]

The increase in BA passengers carried on the SYD-SIN flights is interesting.
BA had sale in early 2019 which made their flights cost competitive compared with QF and others.
But there might be other reasons.

Maybe more stopover traffic? Whilst 40% more SYD-SIN traffic, overall a decline in passengers being carried into/out of Australia on that service by 10%, with a huge drop in the number of passengers travelling all the way to/from LHR in the one go.

 

[Melburnian1]

I may be blind but I couldn’t see the figures on the OD flights ADL-DPS that commenced this year. Plenty of work colleagues and friends have flown with them and reckons it is a big improvement on JQ comfort and service wise. Just wondering if they are eating into JQ’s market significantly on this route or not?

Looking at current schedules, OD has four flights a week but JQ has 11 each way on that ADL - DPS - ADL route.

Because there are two operators, one can't give you a definitive answer.

However in August 2018, there were a total (across the two airlines with these nonstop flights) of 5119 passengers carried from DPS to ADL, and northbound in the other direction 4771. In August 2019 these figures dramatically rose to (respectively) 10914 and 10268.

I don't know what frequency JQ had in August 2018, but if every OD flight operated on the four same days a week in August 2019 as is the case for the present schedule, then OD ran 17 flights each way. The seatguru website lacks the OD configurations but another source suggested its B738s have 169 seats so that means only 2873 seats each way for the month.

If JQ had the same frequency in August as today, and there were no cancellations, it would have operated 46 one way flights ADL - DPS or return. So making the stupid assumption that every OD flight was full, If it's assumed every JQ aircraft used had 186 seats (some A320s have 180), then nominally that's 8556 seats available each way in August 2019.

So if OD was full on every flight, there'd be 8041 carried southbound by JQ DPS to ADL, and 7395 in the northbound ex ADL direction. That equals a load factor of 94 per cent for JQ southbound and 86.4 per cent northbound to DPS.

The answer to your question may therefore be 'no', JQ's loadings haven't been badly affected.