3 ms·

"carrying 10x the people and making the airline a lot more money" Are they? I remember reading that the Qantas international routes were unprofitable for the c

"carrying 10x the people and making the airline a lot more money" Are they? I remember reading that the Qantas international routes were unprofitable for the company, and I've been on long haul Singapore Airlines flights where everyone had an entire row to themselves. (Of course, some routes are vastly more profitable than others.)

jonknee 13y ago
Obviously it depends on the route (ideally one that has no competition and a lot of passengers), but you definitely have more room for profit when carrying 500 people. I've been on a fair share of empty commuter flights as well, you know they're losing money even just counting fuel costs.
yardie 13y ago
For BA the international and cargo flights subsidize everything else in the company. European flights are losing out to LCCs, rail, and bus. If Qantas is losing money on their international fleet someone is embezzling a shitload of money. Qantas rules Australian airports. Qantas is in half a dozen codeshare agreements (typically an airline is in one, Oneworld, Skyteam, etc.) because they can do whatever they want.
- SyneRyder 13y ago
  That could be, Moodys recently downgraded Qantas stock to Junk status, and Qantas have been seeking a government bailout: http://www.smh.com.au/business/moodys-cuts-qantas-credit-rating-by-two-notches-to-junk-status-20140109-30kj0.html http://www.smh.com.au/business/moodys-cuts-qantas-credit-rat... And Qantas was losing $262 Million per year on international, which they've apparently narrowed to a $91 Million annual loss by dropping half of their international routes. For Qantas it was the domestic routes that were subsidizing international: http://skift.com/2013/02/22/qantas-profits-double-after-aussie-airline-drops-half-of-its-international-routes/ http://skift.com/2013/02/22/qantas-profits-double-after-auss...

3 ms·

"carrying 10x the people and making the airline a lot more money" Are they? I remember reading that the Qantas international routes were unprofitable for the c

by SyneRyder 13y ago

jonknee 13y ago
Obviously it depends on the route (ideally one that has no competition and a lot of passengers), but you definitely have more room for profit when carrying 500 people. I've been on a fair share of empty commuter flights as well, you know they're losing money even just counting fuel costs.
yardie 13y ago
For BA the international and cargo flights subsidize everything else in the company. European flights are losing out to LCCs, rail, and bus. If Qantas is losing money on their international fleet someone is embezzling a shitload of money. Qantas rules Australian airports. Qantas is in half a dozen codeshare agreements (typically an airline is in one, Oneworld, Skyteam, etc.) because they can do whatever they want.
- SyneRyder 13y ago
  That could be, Moodys recently downgraded Qantas stock to Junk status, and Qantas have been seeking a government bailout: http://www.smh.com.au/business/moodys-cuts-qantas-credit-rating-by-two-notches-to-junk-status-20140109-30kj0.html http://www.smh.com.au/business/moodys-cuts-qantas-credit-rat... And Qantas was losing $262 Million per year on international, which they've apparently narrowed to a $91 Million annual loss by dropping half of their international routes. For Qantas it was the domestic routes that were subsidizing international: http://skift.com/2013/02/22/qantas-profits-double-after-aussie-airline-drops-half-of-its-international-routes/ http://skift.com/2013/02/22/qantas-profits-double-after-auss...