Bazz,
According to the AO supporters, the whole AO operation was the best one that god ever gave wings to. Surely then, the aircraft type must have had a huge part to play in that 'success'. And taking that line further, the trusty B767 would have been equally successful in the JQ fleet... If, however, as you imply, it would not have been successful at JQ, then why was AO the success that it clearly was (to everyone except those who see the figures and make the decisions)?
And let's not forget that 4/7 of the JQ A330 fleet are not 'spring chickens' anymore. If it were a priority that JQ operate only the most efficient aircraft, then EBA to EBD would be back at mainline, having been replaced by the newest A332s.
Captain K
Nice try, but rubbery figures at best. Firstly, here's a link to the IASC website.
Determinations and Decisions
I'd suggest anyone interested look at determination [2008] IASC 212 for some interesting stats regarding the serious drop in pax numbers by end of March 2008 (while QF still had 29 Japan return trips/week and JQ had 15). This in and of itself might indicate why QF had decided to leave the market by then and why the pax figures for 2009 are so much lower.
Then there's a nasty error in your figures which I will (in a great moment of benevolence) put down to cut-and-paste of dodgy data - it wouldn't be by design, surely? 360547 pax carried by JQ during 1532 flights equates to 235.4 pax per flight. Each aircraft is configured for 303 pax, therefore the average load factor is 77.7%, not 69.1%. The subsequent year's load factor is within about 5% of '08's (77.7%-73.7% = 4%. 4% is a 5.15% of 77.7%), a figure well within expectations taking into account annual variation and 'the downturn'.
QF's figures are pretty accurate if you use an average aircraft configuration of 250 seats (considering the mix of B767s, A332s and A333s).
Overhead Panel et al,
If the decision-makers were to listen to (in)accurate anecdotal feedback, the Cityflyer service would have been long dead and buried! When was the last time you listened to the grumblings from the J class suits as another flight is delayed by anything more than about 15 seconds? I too have asked many pax/staff/managers about their impressions of the JQ Japanese product; they mostly say that it's quite acceptable and that the experience is not unpleasant. So who do we believe? I'd guess that if people were unhappy, then JQ wouldn't continue to see 3/4 load factors year-on-year. The argument that there's no one else for them to fly on is weak - a mate of mine flew to NRT late last year. The cheapest ticket was SIA, and he loved it! Sure it took longer, but it shows there's still choice for punters.
I heard/you heard/they heard is irrelevant. Seats on bums is the only language in this game. When the global financial turnaround is a certainty, you QFers might find that assets move around again so that returns to the group are always maximised.