Cathay Pacific

[Dobbo]

That is pretty disappointing and surprising.

Edit: thinking about it, it might be more to do with obtaining parity with SQ? Even so, this seemed to me to be a shoe in for daily.

 

[Coathanger16]

Just throwing ideas out there - could perhaps the delivery of A350's have slipped recently and CX don't have the aircraft to be able to operate a daily A350 service?

Perhaps in the meantime they're testing the premium demand from MAN - HKG before committing to a daily service. The 5x weekly A350 flights will provide about 19% and 9% increases in business & premium economy respectively, whilst a daily flight would increase those by 66% and 53% respectively (whilst also providing 40% extra economy seats). Given there's a certain degree of economic uncertainty going forward, perhaps their just testing the water as it were.

 

[EGCC_MAN]

There is an instructive lesson in psychology for us here. A prestige major carrier has just announced a new once-weekly frequency between Manchester and Hong Kong. And the result? We're all gloomy as hell!!!

Unfortunately, this is the inevitable outcome of reading too much into slot applications. We raised our own expectations. It is entirely likely that Cathay booked daily slots at both LGW and MAN in the full knowledge that they would eventually only be able to take up some of those extra slots. They had to choose between the two airports (and maybe other routes as well). Once the decision was finalised, they return the unused surplus slots back to the pool.

Don't misunderstand me on this ... I'd love to see CPA go daily on MAN-HKG as much as anybody here. But this is a classic example of why we shouldn't ever be tempted to view speculative slot-applications as indicating a sure thing. Think of them as an expression of interest. The new service / increased frequency announcement is the reliable indicator, and the arrival of the inaugural flight is the confirmation. This is how the industry works.

 

[User001]

EGCC

The speculation about daily was not coming purely from a slot application. It was garnered from information elsewhere, the slot was purely mentioned as it was the only thing even remotely public to substantiate the rumours.

Don't worry, I've been in the industry long enough to know you shouldn't trust a slot request.

 

[EGCC_MAN]

No problem, User. I'm aware that you're in the industry and are familiar with these things. My comments were not directed at you. But many inexperienced observers make an instant mental leap from first mention of a slot request to assumption that a new scheduled service is in the bag. I'm attempting to convey the reality that a slot application is just one stage of a process which sometimes culminates in a new service but often does not.

 

[Land23R]

In a sense User, the fact that the information was not just based on the slot applications makes the outcome more disappointing. It suggests that CX were definitely planning to go daily and for some reason changed their mind. Whether that was down to a/c availability, a slight reduction in LFs from MAN (although of course it's the all important yield that is more crucial), or some other reason, I don't suppose we'll ever know.

 

[User001]

Well, if anything, one would suggest the yield is at least satisfactory, given the increases in the premium cabins while economy stays pretty much stagnant.

 

[ethanegcc]

Although it would have been more pleasing to keep the 777-300ER on a five weekly basis, it is a net gain of 40 seats and another frequency - so it is also good news.

Depending which way you look at it, it actually shows a great vote of confidence in MAN as it conveys that the yields are more than satisfactory, hence increasing premium cabin capacity and defeating the 'no premium demand' from the regions argument which is now rendered dormant in my opinion.

EDIT: I typed this whilst User's comment appeared above - basically saying the same sentiment!

 

[Land23R]

I agree with the point that the increases in seats in the premium cabins suggests that yield is not a factor as such. However, a daily service with an extra 2 flights would have resulted in a further 76 J class seats each week on top of the 30 we are getting, which would mean a 66% increase compared to present with the 4 x B777s (with an overall seat increase of 44%.) Isn't it conceivable that CX concluded that they were more likely to fill those Business class seats from LGW than MAN if, say, a/c availability meant it was one or the other?

One other point. How will freight capacity on 5 x A359s compare to 4 x B777s? Isn't freight considered an important contributor on this route with mention previously on another forum of a record load on one CX flight?

 

[Aceshigh]

Beat me to it re the cargo question.

I think the "deflation" is as much about the fact that LGW has come down the back straight, achieved parity, and has now snook past. That said it is still a London area airport.

The reality is they must be getting good loads as they have a split cost operation at another airport 40 mile up the road. If Manchester had been the better option re ROI they would have chosen it!

 

[David_itl]

Humble apologies from me. Guess my crystal ball wasn't fulling working in the 2016 predictions thread:

Cathay Pacific: change to 6 weekly A350

It almost seems like an "Emiratisation" event when EK, in the days of them being just (just!) daily, when through a ridiculously long period of stellar loads put upward pressure on yield by increasing ticket prices. Been the very odd sign that yields could be better than anticipated with the very occasional use of the 4 class 77W. The other side of the coin is that if they are raising the ticket prices, it could lead to some passengers to now book with Hainan especially if they go daily at the same time and their intended destination was inside mainland China as they will also want to stimulate a bit of demand to help fill the plane even if that route does have a tag-on to Dublin.

 

[Dobbo]

Upon reflection, I still find it disappointing. Slight increase in frequency, but Cargo, Economy, and Premium Economy capacity relatively flat, with only Business class receiving a fair increase.

It may be that the daily flight comes online shortly (only an extra 2x week increase) but as noted they could be under pressure from Hainan and, by the time the 5th weekly flight comes online, Air China and a daily Singapore.

Who knows, but I think the fact CX have added a flight and the reaction is one of disappointment is a sign of generally increased expectations.

 

[ethanegcc]

It is disappointing considering the loads and their success, however an increase is an increase and considering Cathay Pacific has had a troubling year this year, we should be thankful for even this. Plus, there may be aircraft shortages causing this and by summer 2018, they may well increase again. 5 weekly is a good frequency to Hong Kong. What other European airports have that to boast about? Certainly only the major ones.

I don't think Hainan is a direct competitor to CX's market but SQ is and they may very well increase to daily, which could cause more of a heated battle than previously due to Singapore being non-stop.

 

[David_itl]

I don't think Hainan is a direct competitor to CX's market

Found this article addressing the China/Hong Kong "problem"
http://www.scmp.com/business/compan...s-between-uk-and-china-may-pile-pressure-hong
http://www.scmp.com/business/compan...s-between-uk-and-china-may-pile-pressure-hong

 

[Land23R]

I notice that 'spannersatcx' on that other forum calls the announcement 'extremely disappointing' which suggests to me he was fully expecting a daily from MAN. User has also confirmed that his information was not just from the slot application. For some reason, CX appears to have changed their mind but we know not why.

I wonder if MAN will put out a press release, jointly with CX or not.

Anyway, time to move on and let's hope those extra Business & P/E seats are filled. And at least the 5 flights will be with a spanking new aircraft.

 

[Seasider]

Has anyone used the CX service? I flew from LHR to AKL last month in premium economy and didn't rate it at all on the B773. It would be better value booking the front seats in economy and paying a little extra, the seats were not any wider. The A350 wasn't that much better. The HKG-AKL leg was operated by NZ B772 and their premium economy was far superior, bigger leather seats, more legroom and far better food service.

 

[Chilly Dog]

Why 5 is much better than 4...

OK so pardon my amateur maths, but the way I work it out....imagine a passenger searching online for a flight MAN-Asia, to travel on specific dates.

Currently, with flights on only four days week, the chances there'll be a CX option via HKG in both directions on any given date pair is only 33%.

Once we get to five weekly flights, that jumps to 51%. In other words, Cathay from Manchester on the non stop via HKG would currently only be offered to a third of passengers searching online. From next June it becomes half. That's a decent boost.

 

[Dobbo]

I have been wondering a little about LGW sprinting up to a daily operation ahead of MAN. This follows from LGW getting the service to begin with instead of MAN going 8x weekly.

It could simply be that CX make more money at LGW.

However, I have wondered about LGW's attempts to win the new runway battle, and whether that has caused them to offer "silly" deals for long haul routes in an attempt to win the PR battle by showing up the Airport's Commissions numbers as being wrong. I think there was a figure being quoted as LGW having 40 long haul routes by now, when in reality they have around 60.

I wonder if part of their long term strategy is to offer honeymoon deals to selected airlines, like CX?

 

[EGCC_MAN]

Very possibly it is to guarantee slots on one of the most heavily-subscribed single runways in the world. Now seemingly with no prospect of a parallel winning planning approval. Secure the last few while you still can!

 

[Dobbo]

Very possibly it is to guarantee slots on one of the most heavily-subscribed single runways in the world. Now seemingly with no prospect of a parallel winning planning approval. Secure the last few while you still can!

Possibly, although that was the reason last time (could be again of course). Personally, I don't think we've heard the last of the runway debate, but that's another debate entirely.