I would personally like to see Pacific Blue operating non-stop flights trans-Pacific. The problem with opening the route for SQ is that there are others waiting in the wings to jump on the opportunity, and with the ability to dump capacity. How long do you think it would take EK to commence trans-Pacific operations once SQ was given the green light.BlacKnox said:I didn't know Virgin Blue had been lobbying for this route until reading this. Agree with the basic premise that competition is needed, though undecided whether it should be 2 Australian carriers or SQ and QF.
One SQ flight a day is not going to kill QF. It will hurt UA and NZ more than QF due to the Star Alliance links. It would probably be a good thing for trans-Pacific flying. But the thin end of the wedge will not remain there for very long.
But EK has the aircraft, the determination, and the cost base (did anyone say subsidisation???) to commence multiple daily operations from SYD and MEL. As my kids say when they watch Funniest Home Videos - "That's got to hurt". Use Trans-Tasman as an example.
And if we have strong competition from EK on the Trans-Pacific routes, the service in the cheap seats will go the same way as it has gone trans-Tasman. Fares will drop, but so will the service in order to reduce the cost base to retain profitability - something other carriers may not need to achieve on that route. In my mind, that is not only not good for Qantas, but its not good for the aviation industry or for the Australian travelling public. Cheap fares is not the utopia of flying.