For the life of me I can't see why NZ would attempt this as they are simply moving the dots on the map.
They canned the HKG-LHR route a few years back and focused on LAX, so I can't see why this would be better other than go up against QF. The only benefit i can see would be to try and capture traffic to LHR that is otherwise going from MEL/SYD/BNE on NZ and feeding the flights via VA transcon codeshare but given the testy relationship with VA and the fact that VA have both EY and SQ codeshares to Europe that makes no sense either.
From AKL they already fly the optimum one stop route as shown below and the PER route is actually the longest by time:
1. Lounges: They dont have their own lounge in Hong Kong or LAX, however they do (will) in Perth.
2. Competition: There is currently 12 dirrect flights a day from LAX - London, and Hong Kong to London is also very populated. Whereas Perth only has 1 opposing flight.
3. Alliance: The Star alliance will be certainly wanting to service the Perth - London route
4. Transfer: Everyone knows what a disaster LAX is as an airport. Perth would provide a seemless transfer.
5. ANZ Customer base: Air New Zealand relys heavily on Australian PAX. However a stop over in Akl and LAX is not a very convenient routes for an Australian going to London.
6. Duration: Regarding durations mentioned above, to compare accurately, you would say LHR - PER - AKL. Which would be 24 hours 50 mins (Including a 2 hour stop over). So much of a muchness.
I do agree however, for this to work they would need to have an excellent partnership with VA, which isnt that great ATM.
For the life of me I can't see why NZ would attempt this as they are simply moving the dots on the map.
They canned the HKG-LHR route a few years back and focused on LAX, so I can't see why this would be better other than go up against QF. The only benefit i can see would be to try and capture traffic to LHR that is otherwise going from MEL/SYD/BNE on NZ and feeding the flights via VA transcon codeshare but given the testy relationship with VA and the fact that VA have both EY and SQ codeshares to Europe that makes no sense either.
From AKL they already fly the optimum one stop route as shown below and the PER route is actually the longest by time:
AKL-HKG 11h15m
HKG-LHR 12h50m
Total 26h05m (incl 2hr HKG transit)
AKL-PER 7h30m
PER-LHR 17h20m
Total 26h50m (incl 2hr PER transit
AKL-LAX 12h10m
LAX-LHR 10h30m
Total 24h40m (incl 2hr LAX transit)
Taken from google flights, and airline websites.
[/QUOTE]
Really sensible commentary.
Air New Zealand has working along the lines of a pacific rim strategy which this just wouldn't fit into. Plus QF has a massive advantage of feed (both ends) and the placement of crews.
1. Lounges: They dont have their own lounge in Hong Kong or LAX, however they do (will) in Perth.
Pretty sure operates the Star Alliance lounge in LAX.
2. Competition: There is currently 12 dirrect flights a day from LAX - London, and Hong Kong to London is also very populated. Whereas Perth only has 1 opposing flight.
True. But the population of Los Angeles (and Hong Kong) dwarfs Perth.
3. Alliance: The Star alliance will be certainly wanting to service the Perth - London route
Will they? Neither are star alliance hubs. In any case, the global alliances are effectively marketing alliances.
4. Transfer: Everyone knows what a disaster LAX is as an airport. Perth would provide a seemless transfer.
Don't mind LAX these days, but it certainly isn't amazing. The requirement to go through US customs even if just transferring internationally is definitely a disadvantage though.
5. ANZ Customer base: Air New Zealand relys heavily on Australian PAX. However a stop over in Akl and LAX is not a very convenient routes for an Australian going to London.
Air New Zealand does pick up a lot of transfer traffic from Australia... to NZ & flying over the pacific.
That will not necessarily be replicated with a PER stop-over for London flights. Particulary as Virgin & Air New Zealand are not best friends anymore.
6. Duration: Regarding durations mentioned above, to compare accurately, you would say LHR - PER - AKL. Which would be 24 hours 50 mins (Including a 2 hour stop over). So much of a muchness.
I do agree however, for this to work they would need to have an excellent partnership with VA, which isnt that great ATM.
Not sure what 6PR was basing their commentary on, but Air NZ HQ has provided the following statement this morning:
"Hi Chris, we have no current plans to operate direct
flights from Perth to London."
So put that one back in the 'rumour pile'!
Thank you for looking into this Chris, this is one reason I am always wary of these rumours and second-hand 'reports' which spread like wildfire without anybody actually checking things out. It's why I trust AusBT for 'news' compared to a lot of bloggers and forums where people can come up with all sorts of unsubstantiated guff and nobody bothers to find out if it's real.
Would Air NZ or any other airline planning anything like this, reveal their plans by responding to a surprise enquiry from a media organisation? No way! This would be a massive commercial decision and would have a massive planned launch when they were ready to make announcement. Maybe this rumour was started to test the market!
Would Air NZ or any other airline planning anything like this, reveal their plans by responding to a surprise enquiry from a media organisation? No way! This would be a massive commercial decision and would have a massive planned launch when they were ready to make announcement. Maybe this rumour was started to test the market!
aniljak:
PRs have different, subtle ways of wording things when they're smacking something down as an outright no, and when they want to avoid doing so because an announcement is planned and they want to avoid the appearance of backflipping.
"No current plans", as Air NZ commented, is the former, without precluding the airline from considering the option further down the track. "Nothing to announce right now" or similar would the latter, which would hint at a possible announcment without actually saying it. ;)
"Maybe this rumour was started to test the market!"? That's an incredibly unscientific way to assess a market, I can't imagine any airline doing this, it's a very amateur way to dangle a toe into the waters.
What is the date today....not 1 April by chance. There are so many stories of what if or would like. Bit like Turkish Airlines and their promised service to Australia
Boof
Boof
Member since 29 Aug 2013
Total posts 33
For the life of me I can't see why NZ would attempt this as they are simply moving the dots on the map.
They canned the HKG-LHR route a few years back and focused on LAX, so I can't see why this would be better other than go up against QF. The only benefit i can see would be to try and capture traffic to LHR that is otherwise going from MEL/SYD/BNE on NZ and feeding the flights via VA transcon codeshare but given the testy relationship with VA and the fact that VA have both EY and SQ codeshares to Europe that makes no sense either.
From AKL they already fly the optimum one stop route as shown below and the PER route is actually the longest by time:
AKL-HKG 11h15m
HKG-LHR 12h50m
Total 26h05m (incl 2hr HKG transit)
AKL-PER 7h30m
PER-LHR 17h20m
Total 26h50m (incl 2hr PER transit
AKL-LAX 12h10m
LAX-LHR 10h30m
Total 24h40m (incl 2hr LAX transit)
Taken from google flights, and airline websites.
Mjudd
Mjudd
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 14 Dec 2016
Total posts 57
This is why ANZ WOULD do it:
1. Lounges: They dont have their own lounge in Hong Kong or LAX, however they do (will) in Perth.
2. Competition: There is currently 12 dirrect flights a day from LAX - London, and Hong Kong to London is also very populated. Whereas Perth only has 1 opposing flight.
3. Alliance: The Star alliance will be certainly wanting to service the Perth - London route
4. Transfer: Everyone knows what a disaster LAX is as an airport. Perth would provide a seemless transfer.
5. ANZ Customer base: Air New Zealand relys heavily on Australian PAX. However a stop over in Akl and LAX is not a very convenient routes for an Australian going to London.
6. Duration: Regarding durations mentioned above, to compare accurately, you would say LHR - PER - AKL. Which would be 24 hours 50 mins (Including a 2 hour stop over). So much of a muchness.
I do agree however, for this to work they would need to have an excellent partnership with VA, which isnt that great ATM.
Chris C.
Chris C.
Member since 24 Apr 2012
Total posts 1,116
Not sure what 6PR was basing their commentary on, but Air NZ HQ has provided the following statement this morning:
"Hi Chris, we have no current plans to operate direct flights from Perth to London."
So put that one back in the 'rumour pile'!
hutch
hutch
Member since 07 Oct 2012
Total posts 771
[QUOTE=5826;41088]
They canned the HKG-LHR route a few years back and focused on LAX, so I can't see why this would be better other than go up against QF. The only benefit i can see would be to try and capture traffic to LHR that is otherwise going from MEL/SYD/BNE on NZ and feeding the flights via VA transcon codeshare but given the testy relationship with VA and the fact that VA have both EY and SQ codeshares to Europe that makes no sense either.
From AKL they already fly the optimum one stop route as shown below and the PER route is actually the longest by time:
AKL-HKG 11h15m
HKG-LHR 12h50m
Total 26h05m (incl 2hr HKG transit)
AKL-PER 7h30m
PER-LHR 17h20m
Total 26h50m (incl 2hr PER transit
AKL-LAX 12h10m
LAX-LHR 10h30m
Total 24h40m (incl 2hr LAX transit)
Taken from google flights, and airline websites.
[/QUOTE]
hutch
hutch
Member since 07 Oct 2012
Total posts 771
[QUOTE=15246;41090]
1. Lounges: They dont have their own lounge in Hong Kong or LAX, however they do (will) in Perth.
Pretty sure operates the Star Alliance lounge in LAX.
2. Competition: There is currently 12 dirrect flights a day from LAX - London, and Hong Kong to London is also very populated. Whereas Perth only has 1 opposing flight.
True. But the population of Los Angeles (and Hong Kong) dwarfs Perth.
3. Alliance: The Star alliance will be certainly wanting to service the Perth - London route
Will they? Neither are star alliance hubs. In any case, the global alliances are effectively marketing alliances.
4. Transfer: Everyone knows what a disaster LAX is as an airport. Perth would provide a seemless transfer.
Don't mind LAX these days, but it certainly isn't amazing. The requirement to go through US customs even if just transferring internationally is definitely a disadvantage though.
5. ANZ Customer base: Air New Zealand relys heavily on Australian PAX. However a stop over in Akl and LAX is not a very convenient routes for an Australian going to London.
Air New Zealand does pick up a lot of transfer traffic from Australia... to NZ & flying over the pacific.
That will not necessarily be replicated with a PER stop-over for London flights. Particulary as Virgin & Air New Zealand are not best friends anymore.
6. Duration: Regarding durations mentioned above, to compare accurately, you would say LHR - PER - AKL. Which would be 24 hours 50 mins (Including a 2 hour stop over). So much of a muchness.
I do agree however, for this to work they would need to have an excellent partnership with VA, which isnt that great ATM.
[/QUOTE]
Bob Burgess
Bob Burgess
Member since 13 Sep 2016
Total posts 49
"Hi Chris, we have no current plans to operate direct flights from Perth to London."
So put that one back in the 'rumour pile'!
Thank you for looking into this Chris, this is one reason I am always wary of these rumours and second-hand 'reports' which spread like wildfire without anybody actually checking things out. It's why I trust AusBT for 'news' compared to a lot of bloggers and forums where people can come up with all sorts of unsubstantiated guff and nobody bothers to find out if it's real.
aniljak
aniljak
Member since 15 Sep 2012
Total posts 98
Would Air NZ or any other airline planning anything like this, reveal their plans by responding to a surprise enquiry from a media organisation? No way! This would be a massive commercial decision and would have a massive planned launch when they were ready to make announcement. Maybe this rumour was started to test the market!
Chris C.
Chris C.
Member since 24 Apr 2012
Total posts 1,116
PRs have different, subtle ways of wording things when they're smacking something down as an outright no, and when they want to avoid doing so because an announcement is planned and they want to avoid the appearance of backflipping.
"No current plans", as Air NZ commented, is the former, without precluding the airline from considering the option further down the track. "Nothing to announce right now" or similar would the latter, which would hint at a possible announcment without actually saying it. ;)
Bob Burgess
Bob Burgess
Member since 13 Sep 2016
Total posts 49
"Maybe this rumour was started to test the market!"? That's an incredibly unscientific way to assess a market, I can't imagine any airline doing this, it's a very amateur way to dangle a toe into the waters.
Nick Sydney 2
Nick Sydney 2
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 22 Jul 2015
Total posts 83
What is the date today....not 1 April by chance. There are so many stories of what if or would like. Bit like Turkish Airlines and their promised service to Australia
Wiz
Wiz
Member since 25 Sep 2017
Total posts 3
Adventuregirl
Adventuregirl
Air New Zealand - Airpoints
Member since 18 Oct 2017
Total posts 1
Any update about PER-LHR from AirNZ? It's a fantastic option for NZ customers who would like to avoid LAX.