Mr_Orange
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2013
- Posts
- 5,393
a) QF used to do this (PER/BNE/ADL/SYD/MEL -> SIN -> LHR/FRA) and it didn't work, so why would it work now?
b) What market demand is there for F to CDG/FRA/BER? especially out of BNE? I doubt very much at all
c) What European carriers fly to Australia - BA only. That probably gives you some idea of the Europe <-> Australia demand. No one in Europe - and there's lots of big airlines there - can make it work (outside BA), so why would QF make it work the other way? Partnering with EK (or better utilising CX / MH) allows one-stop access to major European ports, which beats two-stop via LHR
You really needed to take all of my post as one whole idea, not cherry pick bits apart. F was a 'maybe', perhaps that isn't viable, although EK fly F from BNE!
The crux of it was to offer a service that is above the competition, i.e. the new J suites (maybe the new F suites) along with PE and Y in order to attract pax on to the route. It also gives them a reason to keep PER-SIN and reinstate ADL-SIN. If they expand routes, it gives pax the opportunity to remain loyal to QF and therefore generate revenue and hopefully profits.
Many people in Aus do not want to fly through the desert to Europe and since that is the only option with QF at the moment they now fly with OW partners which strips revenue from QF.
I'm not saying it's a perfect idea and maybe it needs to go to LHR despite peoples' dislike of that port.