Virgin challenges Qantas on US route - smh.com.au story
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Virgin challenges Qantas on US route - smh.com.au story
From smh.com.au; this would suggest they've got equipment lined up?
Virgin challenges Qantas on US route
Jason Koutsoukis
September 24, 2006
AIR fares to the US may be slashed, with discount airline Virgin Blue expected to announce plans within the next two months to fly across the Pacific.
The airline's executives are finalising details that would lead to it competing head-to-head with Qantas on one of its most profitable routes.
Qantas has a virtual monopoly on the busy trans-Pacific route, carrying about 75 per cent of passengers. Its only competitor is the US-based United Airlines. Virgin Blue is currently negotiating with the Federal Government to get greater access to the US.
The airline's chief executive Brett Godfrey wants a minimum seven flights to the US, which the airline believes it would need to compete effectively with Qantas and United.
Virgin Blue is controlled by transport giant Toll Holdings. The company's founder, Sir Richard Branson, owns a 25 per cent stake through his Virgin Group. "The package is not yet finalised," a senior Virgin Blue source said.
Source: The Sun-Herald
Virgin challenges Qantas on US route
Jason Koutsoukis
September 24, 2006
AIR fares to the US may be slashed, with discount airline Virgin Blue expected to announce plans within the next two months to fly across the Pacific.
The airline's executives are finalising details that would lead to it competing head-to-head with Qantas on one of its most profitable routes.
Qantas has a virtual monopoly on the busy trans-Pacific route, carrying about 75 per cent of passengers. Its only competitor is the US-based United Airlines. Virgin Blue is currently negotiating with the Federal Government to get greater access to the US.
The airline's chief executive Brett Godfrey wants a minimum seven flights to the US, which the airline believes it would need to compete effectively with Qantas and United.
Virgin Blue is controlled by transport giant Toll Holdings. The company's founder, Sir Richard Branson, owns a 25 per cent stake through his Virgin Group. "The package is not yet finalised," a senior Virgin Blue source said.
Source: The Sun-Herald
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Ok. I'll start the ball rolling...
What type would they operate? And would the big "sir" have much say in the it???
Oh.. and is it going to be a seperate operation?
Go to it lads
What type would they operate? And would the big "sir" have much say in the it???
Oh.. and is it going to be a seperate operation?
Go to it lads
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cut price to usa
the angst amongst certain individuals when it comes to qf and the so called wholly grail (pacific route) amazes me.the empire was founded on the kangaroo route which currently is just about an open skies policy.yes the red rat protects itself well when it comes to the pacific,but exactly what is the seat per kilometer break even point ?
with all the backstabbing and b"#$ching with regards to jstar,virgin,auz airline pay awards i guess the queue will once again be long to sign up for vb pacific crewing requirements .
i at least hope that they look at 777 or 787 because we all eagerly await the big bus
with all the backstabbing and b"#$ching with regards to jstar,virgin,auz airline pay awards i guess the queue will once again be long to sign up for vb pacific crewing requirements .
i at least hope that they look at 777 or 787 because we all eagerly await the big bus
It wasn't so long ago that the holy grail was the Japanese route.
Now look at it!
Reducing market....JAL withdrawing...
Competiton is necessary, let's just hope for the VB guys and girls that BG gets it right!
Now look at it!
Reducing market....JAL withdrawing...
Competiton is necessary, let's just hope for the VB guys and girls that BG gets it right!
Watch this space.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B777 is my guess - a far more efficient aircraft. Just look how well the A340 is selling!
As for Pacific Blue getting the flying - would depend to the VB EBA outcome I would think, though pilot moral would certainly nosedive if the flying went elsewhere.
As for Pacific Blue getting the flying - would depend to the VB EBA outcome I would think, though pilot moral would certainly nosedive if the flying went elsewhere.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Great Southern Land
Age: 73
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAPTBOB
I don't think you are quite correct there............Ansett flew SYD-HKG which was/is a significant route for Qantas. They also both serviced Taipei and Kansai.
I don't think you are quite correct there............Ansett flew SYD-HKG which was/is a significant route for Qantas. They also both serviced Taipei and Kansai.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dunedin, NZ
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seven frequencies? So, I think this means VB wants to start with a daily service between SYD and LAX. They can use handmedown A340-300s or 747-400s from Virgin Atlantic, or perhaps 777-300ERs or 777-200LRs white tails (from Emirates?).
VB might feel they owe a bit to their home town - BNE - and if they want to serve MEL, that would be better if it could be a non stop, which would affect choice of fleet.
If they fly to LAX they will be using the US West Coast's least popular gateway (you use that airport because you have to,) SFO would be nicer except on foggy days
So, if VB gets seven weekly frequencies, and that is the limit, they may find themselves reaching the limit very quickly.
Other point - United is not a minor competitor, and should not be written off. Every Southern Summer recently, UAL has added three weekly flights on SYDLAX and SYDSFO, making 10 services per week on each route. UAL has recently expanded its flights on the North Pacific - if UAL thought it could make money from running a second daily SYDLAX service year round it would find the planes somewhere.
IF UAL gets its act together it will be very strong competition for both Qantas and Virgin Blue
VB might feel they owe a bit to their home town - BNE - and if they want to serve MEL, that would be better if it could be a non stop, which would affect choice of fleet.
If they fly to LAX they will be using the US West Coast's least popular gateway (you use that airport because you have to,) SFO would be nicer except on foggy days
So, if VB gets seven weekly frequencies, and that is the limit, they may find themselves reaching the limit very quickly.
Other point - United is not a minor competitor, and should not be written off. Every Southern Summer recently, UAL has added three weekly flights on SYDLAX and SYDSFO, making 10 services per week on each route. UAL has recently expanded its flights on the North Pacific - if UAL thought it could make money from running a second daily SYDLAX service year round it would find the planes somewhere.
IF UAL gets its act together it will be very strong competition for both Qantas and Virgin Blue
Very interesting proposal indeed!
VB would be very optimistic if it threw 744's on the pacific. That is very serious capacity! However it all depends on the what entitlements they get. They have stated they want frequency in the way of at least seven services per week. Something smaller in capacity then....but what? Discount the A340....777 blows it's economic backside out of the water, even Airbus acknowledges that. However it would be cheap to lease/buy and the chances of getting 777's in the short term are slim.
Then of course is UA. After it restructures and can see a buck to be made, it will go for it!
Like I said I hope BG get's the formula right!
VB would be very optimistic if it threw 744's on the pacific. That is very serious capacity! However it all depends on the what entitlements they get. They have stated they want frequency in the way of at least seven services per week. Something smaller in capacity then....but what? Discount the A340....777 blows it's economic backside out of the water, even Airbus acknowledges that. However it would be cheap to lease/buy and the chances of getting 777's in the short term are slim.
Then of course is UA. After it restructures and can see a buck to be made, it will go for it!
Like I said I hope BG get's the formula right!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: all over the shop
Posts: 986
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Break Right
Virgin Atlantic initially
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I tend to think the US airlines like UA are a bit constrained at present through there CH11 machinations and getting furloughed pilots back online...plus I think they are focused on China (Beijing) and other high yield routes.