The PIP -8I has better seat costs than the 77W and similar seat costs to the much larger A380 (but carries more cargo).
What are you smoking ? The only way a 747-8i beats the 773-300ER or A380-800 in real airline configurations is if the cost of financing the engines and airframes is well below market rates.
Oh, and I've heard you could get a great deal on the Intercontinental right now. What's not to love?
ANY airline can get a great deal on a 747-8i, and no one is buying. Boeing is desperate to get 747-8 customers, they offered CX an "amazing" deal on them as interim lift before the 777-9X, CX did not bite.
The A350s will never reach the east coast of NAM with a CX payload, although it might be a great airplane for Europe and down under. I guess I just don't see the big picture...
You said the same about the A380, never be able to get to NAM, does not have enroute alternates to fly to Europe etc. Many operators are doing exactly what you said not possible. EK carry more cargo ULH on their A380s than they do on the 77W.
A380s have replaced 77W on the DXB-LAX, which is a couple of hundred miles further than HKG-JFK (EK flew DXB-LAX in 15:07 last week).
CX will be flying A350s to both the east and west coast of NAM. If they really wanted to push it, the A350-900 could do MCO & IAH non-stop if there was a business case for it. New ULH routes will never appear unless CX receives sufficient upfront commitments from companies wanting to use the service.
Have a look at this
The Super Twin Battle: A350-1000 versus 777-9X | AirInsight