Yes o.k. don't take my words literally , but you cannot deny it was of no coincidence that the joining of the star alliance meant the end for this service with the inevitable standard excuse of '' not enough yield '' used for a service that had a PLF of over 75%
Well your words spell out the problem exactly - loads good, yields not enough to justify the route.
I doubt very much that this route was about serving the city of Brotherly love. Let's fact it - just how much ptp business is there that couldn't easily be served by UA to EWR and then picking up a rental car or jumping on Amtrak?
So US were going up against UA and the European majors for the conx traffic. Summer is going to be busy anyway, so 75%, given the opportunity to connect throughout most of the USA, is hardly spectacular in that season.
I'm not surprised the route didn't work, and don't see it as political. A different airline to a different city, which is viable for O&D as well as conx (ORD springs to mind, presumably post 2014 if with a 767) and maybe there'd be a different story.....
I seem to remember reading somewhere else that QF have said if LHR runs out of suitable capacity they will simply increase flights from FRA and feed UK pax through there.
I can't see the logic in adding another needless stop on what is already a very long route. Surely this is just huffing up, maybe to draw attention from the fact QF have actually pulled their LHR-HKG & BKK routes anyway?
Just to clarify - even post 2014, is SIN doable in a 744 or 380?