Detailed answer for Kuhn Sandy & Pluto

Sandy Cruden wrote: 
And John Howard brought up the subject of a Qantas SIA merger again
today Khun Pluto,
I would be very interested to hear your's and Khun No-spam's opinions
on this.

IMO more rationalisation of the airline industry is inevitable, and a
merged Qantas and SIA would be a formidable force.

Sandy
Huay Khwaang

Both are bottom line Oriented carriers with youngish fleets one extraordinarily well maintained. Although QF is looking at shifting a lot of its heavy servicing to China giving a few in Aus some career path worries.

Singapore and its buying leverage and extensive routes and sensible schedules will always be a force that keeps the players on their toes.
Passenger approval on cabin service and despatch reliability is high.

Emirates and CX are the two main players that will keep SQ honest although Emirates at this stage is not getting into a low cost subsidiary.

The SQ Model with Tiger under the stewardship of Davis and with Ryan air also involved backed up by its other subsidiary Silk Air along with
catering training and simulator assets and contract services as well as a cashed up and powerful finance arm makes them an almost certain serious player.
Also Singapore's ability to hedge its fuel on Island as well as off is a big factor as well.

Qantas Jetstar Asia and Value air are behind in their marketing. But catching up fast. Air new Zealand debt to equity ratios and no where as deep pockets could always be in for tough times unless it continues to grow its yields . Being at the real end (or beginning) of routes
and by comparison small home customer base. Must be leaner better and swifter to not become again a drain on the public purse.
It is however a good airline for the Pacific & Tasman by its fleet mix and route structure. But by world standards is always more a target for merger or take over than growth by acquisition

CX Swire Dragon Are the current real players in the region
in cargo and pax in/out of the China's.

BA within the region is not really a contender concentrating its resources in Europe and Atlantic routes.As the competition is less than in Asia and better seat revenue than Asia in Bus & First full Economy etc.

The real insiders at this time are betting the purported talks about QF & SQ is more a device to play off the two manufactures against each other and the tied finance arms of the various manufactures and the heavily Government subsidised option plans.

The dirty tricks departments and tactics are legend.

Boeing were pretty smart in pulling the rug out from under the frogs
and undermining the resale value of the already minus equity used hulls
of the French manufacturer .
This month and the initial orders of the new 747 8 series has really
put the frogs into a panic. One heavy user and big orderer of Airbus
said the other day that Boeing may have really foxed Scarebus into spending far too many billions on a plane that just ain't going to cut it
now the 747 8 is out of the closet. That along with the proven and popular 777 series and the Dream liner 787 order book now getting realistic and non refundable orders despite the lunatic deals offered by the frogs on an inferior product.Has the garlic munchers from Toulouse
running numbers that only make them say Merde'

Example  consider the following :
Using a QF Routing Model with the Big Scarebus.
The place where QF probably needs it the most is on the route of the
thousand Islands (to the USA), where most days QF has 5 744's flying
out of Los Angeles. It will also give them a 'leg up' on the
competition, and to be blunt, the margins to the USA are a lot better
than they are to Europe. As much as anything, the SFO services are
probably being in driven in part by facility limitations at Los
Angeles.

An analysis of probable payload on the A380 for the LAX-SYD run is
consistent with the number of seats QF plans on the aircraft. They
could put more seats on A380's going to Europe over BKK or SIN or HKG.

Like all Ultra Range Aircraft, you can have you choice, either range,
or passengers, but not both at the same time. So far none of the A380
carriers plan on getting especially close to the 555 or so claimed.
However when you look at the assumption that go into those passenger
loads, it becomes clear that they involve a lot of wishful thinking.
Good luck selling a Business class seat on a 15 hours flight with a 39
inch pitch at anything like what a seat with 55-60 inch seat pitch and
a lie flat bed goes for. (I'd add that the passenger capacity quoted
for the 787 and A350 are based upon the same assumptions, and they
aren't going to happen either).

An A380F flying non-stop HKG-MEM for Fedex will carry substantially
LESS payload than a single  MD11 stopping at ANC or FAI would. It
works for Fedex because they can charge a premium for the couple hours
saved. If you can get $20/Kg instead of $3/Kg by saving 2 hours, you
can a huge hit on payload and it still makes money.

On Tuesday it got a bit more complicated again Boeing Versus Airbus scenario:

   Since Boeing has released relatively few details (MGTOW,OEW, MZFW,
etc) it is hard to judge the importance of this. Some kind of product
enhancement for the 747 has been in the works for a very long time,
and there were several false starts, but apparently there are orders
for the freighter. Boeing claims a lower trip cost versus the A380F.

To be blunt, that isn't saying much. The ratio of Payload to EW on the
A380F is considerably worse than the D10, MD11, 747F or even D8-7X.

So for many transpacific, and transatlantic freight missions, it is
likely that the 747-8 will have better ton mile costs than the A380.
The question is will they be enough better than say a 747-400SF to
justify initial outlay?

The attractiveness of the A380F rests in several specific markets
where you can save enough time from flying non-stop, to make the
transport of high value goods (at very high rates per Kilo) attractive.
That is why A380F sales have been a little  lack lustre.

To the general air freight market, it is not very attractive.

I wouldn't want to take any bets as to how long it takes for the first
order for a passenger version to appear.

You need to be able to charge an arm and leg  because the payload hit
in these 'super missions' like HKG-MEM is vast. A single D10F flying
from Hong Kong to Memphis with a stop at FAI or ANC can carry a lot
more cargo than an A380F flying non-stop.

Fedex gets a whole lot more than 5USD/Kg for courier packages
travelling between HKG and NYC for example. If you can charge enough
for what you do carry, then you don't have carry as much to be
profitable. That is the long and the short of the Fedex and UPS A380F
orders.
Once China gets its act together in the logistics market other factors will come into play.

::::





.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 2008 Accord
    ... We have the sedan EX-L. ... Power PASSENGER seat is ONLY available with the ... Honda seat if you can't live with a pillow. ...
    (rec.autos.makers.honda)
  • Re: Southwest allowing reservations only through March 31, 2006
    ... >>Not according to the law for that. ... > Carriers are not required to furnish more than one seat per ticket ... > passenger has purchased. ... seat other than a bulkhead seat. ...
    (rec.travel.air)
  • Re: XC reservations
    ... The prospect of buying a ticket and then risking having to ... be for that passenger to buy the ticket before the train begins its ... some people won't get a seat. ...
    (uk.railway)
  • Re: "Number" of elements; was: Distinct linear orderings on Z
    ... >use BOTH proper subset AND the cardinality theory, ... How is there one more seat? ... takes the seat that matches their label. ... passenger, with the label 0 on his jacket, runs up and gets on the bus. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: China is going to eat someones lunch again.
    ... Boeing drove the UK and European passenger aircraft industry to ... Airbus and they have come quite aways in 20 years, ... there is a big market for large ...
    (soc.culture.china)