DavidByrne wrote:

nz2 wrote:

Sorry if this has been discussed previously, but I was in NSN this week and saw 3 Virgin ATR's sitting there with all windows covered up. All 3 had a door open and a couple of guys in hi-viz standing around but not much activity. What is the go here?

VA signed a five-year maintenance agreement with Air NZ in March this year whereby their 14 ATRs would be sent to Nelson for heavy maintenance. However, within a couple of months they had significantly downsized their ATR plans, deciding to reduce the fleet to just six IIRC. Theoretically there are now eight ATRs surplus to requirements, and I assume that the three at NSN (I saw them myself in October and again early this month when flying in and out of NSN) are now awaiting their next owner. They certainly don't seem to be being sent back to Australia to be reincorporated in the fleet.

I wonder where this leaves the five-year contract between VA and NZ. Presumably VA gave themselves an "out" clause, but I wonder how much NZ was in the know about the real possibility that the contract might be truncated. Their trumpeting of the contract back in March didn't give any clue that it might not be the money-spinner they'd thought.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news ... -in-Nelson

There have been 4 VA ATRs for a few months there. One is parked at a separate location down the far end.

Does anyone know what registrations the NEOs are getting? On Part 169, it was mentioned ZK-OYx registrations, but that was a long time ago. Any updates?

aerokiwi wrote:

The best proxy for American revenue is the sales from that market

This is an airline service, with potential revenue from both sides of the route - the relevant market is more than just American revenue.

aerokiwi wrote:

I'm assuming there is no immediate breakdown of actual geographic market performance, though I'll dig around more later to see. So your assertion that the sales to Australians and Kiwis are for North American services is guesswork for now.

According to CAPA (in September 2017), the latest data on the Australia - United States corridor is for 2011 - 2014 (NZ grew from a 5.2% to a 5.7% market share), so we have to look for sources of information other than pure statistics. In this respect, my posts are backed up by statements of senior executives of a listed organisation, in its annual reporting (which are subject to strict disclosure requirements). As per NZ's '2017 Annual Results Analyst Presentation,' "The "Better Way to Fly" campaign continues to gain traction to grow North and South America via Auckland." Earlier this year, Christopher Luxon also said that NZ's push for Australia - United States traffic had been "much more successful than we anticipated." This is no "assertion" or "guesswork" - it is NZ's insight.

I would further point out the following statements from key players at NZ:

- Christopher Luxon has said that "new routes to the United States and Latin America seemed to be performing well."
- Cam Wallace has said, regarding IAH, that "it's fantastic to see strong demand from both ends of the route."
- Liz Frazer has said that, regarding HNL and YVR, capacity increases are "illustrating the demand for travel."

See:
- https://centreforaviation.com/insights/ ... -jv-369166.
- http://australianaviation.com.au/2017/0 ... lf-profit/.
- https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/96034926.
- https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/press-r ... n-services.
- http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/2 ... d-Campaign.

aerokiwi wrote:

And I wouldn't rely on supermarket disclosure requirements to give confidence that you're getting the whole story. Airlines are notorious for coughing negative results in bollacky language and getting away with it.

I do not know what "notorious" airlines you are talking about, but they are likely irrelevant comparisons, either being un-listed, or being listed on a different stock exchange. In New Zealand, we have strict disclosure obligations for listed companies, with strict penalties for non-compliance. Our regulatory environment is only getting stricter, with the the NZX Corporate Governance Code 2017 giving a big push to non-financial disclosure too. IMHO, to write off NZ's statements on its performance as being "coughing" or "bollacky" is naive. If this was really NZ's end-game, then why bother to single out Asia as a negative performer, when the decline in revenue from Asia was less than that from America? If NZ did not care about disclosure rules, it could have put a "bollacky" spin on Asia too.

aerokiwi wrote:

Yes I understand currency impacts. But that doesn't negate the decline in revenues. For whatever reason - currency, competition - it's substantial and any company would be concerned by that

You cannot equate competition with currency - NZ can far more easily control competition, like by improving its product to exceed that of a competitor.

Further, currency can account for performance - a decline in revenue can be attributable to NZ's revenue being worth less in NZD, in any given year.

Cheers,

C.

You're mistaking qualitative reporting that is open to interpretation - "the results are better than expected"... define "expected" - with quantitative data... actual revenue. I think I'll go with the hard figures for now.

NZ has no doubt disclosed everything they're obligated too. But there's always that qualitative BS that analysts generally understand and recognise while retail investors miss. Needless to say NZ's revenue has undeniably dropped quite significantly from several major markets. Bummer. And harks back to the observations from a few years back that NZ's performance was largely dependent on monopoly or duopoly routes.

How might NZ respond? Expand destinations or frequencies or change aircraft to those markets? Or consolidate and ride it out till the markets settle? I dunno but my hunch is to expand, which is far more exciting.

Looks it's not personal - I worked on a project for the first 5 months of the year involving disclosure from publicly listed companies and unsupported conclusions and related governance issues. So a personal bee in my bonnet. And like I said... I haven't read the full financial reports. But airlines the world over are some of the worst at disclosure, partly explaining why they're usually such terrible investments. I'll leave it at that.

Tourism Australia's latest data on visitor arrivals is quite interesting:

- New Zealand visitors: -7.3%
- Chinese visitors: +18.1%

It is noteworthy that Chinese tourism to Australia is growing by double digits, while Chinese tourism to New Zealand is almost flat-lining.

See: https://blueswandaily.com/visitor-arriv ... -sep-2017/.

Separately, it is encouraging to hear that TG has witnessed an increase in demand for Business Class on its flights out of New Zealand.

See: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1711/S ... -trade.htm.

aerokiwi wrote:

quantitative data... actual revenue. I think I'll go with the hard figures for now.

Okay - care to explain why Asia was singled out negatively in the results, when its decline in revenue was less than in America?

Perhaps it could be because one revenue figure from one year is incapable of measuring meaningful commercial performance?

Just a thought ...

Cheers,

C.

Qantas and Sri Lankan have expanded their code shares - to include NZ:

http://australianaviation.com.au/2017/1 ... odeshares/

"Qantas and SriLankan expand codeshares

SriLankan will add its UL airline code on Qantas-operated flights from Melbourne to Adelaide, Brisbane and Sydney, as well as from Melbourne to Auckland in New Zealand

(The) previous codeshare agreement is ongoing, meaning Qantas customers have the option of travelling to Colombo via Bangkok, Hong Kong or Singapore on the airline’s QF code.

I have a very soft spot for Sri Lanka (wonderful food!) and I'd love to see NZ fly there. - with connections to India.

mariner

mariner wrote:

Qantas and Sri Lankan have expanded their code shares - to include NZ

Duplicate - already discussed above, at post #135.

UL will not come to AKL - its plan is to launch SYD, if MEL goes well (as I discussed in the Australian Aviation Thread).

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

mariner wrote:

Qantas and Sri Lankan have expanded their code shares - to include NZ

Duplicate - already discussed above, at post #135.

UL will not come to AKL - its plan is to launch SYD, if MEL goes well (as I discussed in the Australian Aviation Thread)..

Ask for its deletion then.

There's so much stuff - and so many pix - in post #135 I guess I missed it and I don't follow the Australian thread too closely these days.

I used it as a way to express my wish for NZ to fly to Sri Lanka. I didn't suggest that Sri Lankan would fly here, but, as I say, it's easily deleted and I won't shed any tears if it is. LOL. I don't come here to argue.

mariner

Can we just take a moment to appreciate how low Chinese fares from AKL are?

- AKL - PVG on CZ is NZD 459 (or AUD 414) return - cheapest
- AKL - CKG on GS is NZD 494 (or AUD 446) return

For comparison, some airfares from AKL to Australia are more expensive than this!

- AKL - SYD on NZ is NZD 439 (or AUD 396) return
- AKL - MEL on NZ is NZD 479 (or AUD 432) return

For comparison with Australia - China fares (the cheapest, and CZ's PVG fares):

- SYD - PVG on PR is AUD 539 (or NZD 596) return - cheapest
- SYD - PVG on CZ is AUD 701 (or NZD 776) return
- MEL - PVG on 3U is AUD 588 (or NZD 651) return - cheapest
- MEL - PVG on CZ is AUD 761 (or NZD 842) return

See:
- http://www.statravel.co.nz/cheap-flights-to-asia.htm.
- http://www.statravel.com.au/cheap-fligh ... hts-region.
- https://global.tianjin-air.com/NZ/GB/Home.

I wonder why CZ feels such a need to discount flights out of AKL (compared to Australia).

In contrast to China, flights to other markets (like Indonesia) are more expensive from AKL.

It is no wonder why NZ singled out Asia (negatively) in its results analysis, earlier this year.

Cheers,

C.

Finder.com has found something a bit interesting:

https://www.finder.com.au/air-new-zeala ... tion-rates

"Air New Zealand has Australia’s highest customer satisfaction rates. The silver fern satisfies.

A report has found Air New Zealand to be the most customer-satisfying international airline operating in Australia with a satisfaction rating of 88.8%. It edged out Singapore Airlines (88.3%) and Emirates (87.3%) to take first place for customer satisfaction in the September 2017 Roy Morgan Airline Customer Satisfaction report.

Further down were Etihad (85.4%) and Cathay Pacific (84%) and Garuda Indonesia (82.2%).

I don't usually pay too much attention to these surveys such as this, but this one intrigued me because NZ is in such heady company - and leading the pack.

mariner

CZ and others discount because that is the only way to fill empty planes in the face of chronic overcapacity. Make no mistake, China has much too much capacity for the market size, it's just the "me too" attitude of these carriers that want to be a part of it because everyone else is, rather than making a profit that drives them here
Your average airline is lucky to make money on a basic fare, of almost double that, so a hugely discounted fare is basically a loss, and the thing is they still don't appear to be full so there is widespread availability for these cheap fares.

CZ has low fares to PVG because it doesn't fly direct and is trying to compete with NZ and MU. I imagine seats are limited at this price. It's fares to CAN and other destinations are higher, yes?

aerorobnz wrote:

CZ and others discount because that is the only way to fill empty planes in the face of chronic overcapacity. Make no mistake, China has much too much capacity for the market size

I guess the questions are:

- Is there really over-capacity to AKL, but not to SYD / MEL, when Australia has more airlines (think JD, MF etc) and bigger planes (think CZ's A380s)?
- If CZ really needs those low prices out of AKL, but not SYD / MEL, why not reduce frequency (2x daily to 1x daily) or capacity (787 instead of 77W)?

Another interesting point here is that Chinese tourism growth to New Zealand is flat-lining, while to Australia, it is booming - why is New Zealand so weak?

NZ321 wrote:

CZ has low fares to PVG because it doesn't fly direct and is trying to compete with NZ and MU.

Why does CZ care about PVG, but not other cities? 3U, GS and HU do not single out PVG in their pricing, even though they do not fly AKL - PVG too.

I would also point out that CZ does not fly SYD / MEL - PVG direct either, but its pricing for those routes is much higher than it is for AKL - PVG.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

aerorobnz wrote:

CZ and others discount because that is the only way to fill empty planes in the face of chronic overcapacity. Make no mistake, China has much too much capacity for the market size

I guess the questions are:

- Is there really over-capacity to AKL, but not to SYD / MEL, when Australia has more airlines (think JD, MF etc) and bigger planes (think CZ's A380s)?
- If CZ really needs those low prices out of AKL, but not SYD / MEL, why not reduce frequency (2x daily to 1x daily) or capacity (787 instead of 77W)?

Another interesting point here is that Chinese tourism growth to New Zealand is flat-lining, while to Australia, it is booming - why is New Zealand so weak?

Yes, there is absolutely overcapacity to all of Chinese airlines' Australasia routes. Australia is a much bigger market. Perhaps even though they can't fill the planes ex Aus, it's still better than ex AKL. China has a stupid one airline one route policy so these airlines are flying the routes to prevent another from entering even if it means operating at a loss. For CZ, they see their hub CAN to be an important part of their transit strategy for transit pax. So the low fares not only help fill one plane, they fill two.

Australia has more to offer Chinese tourists. With airfares not much different from going to Thailand nowadays, why wouldn't they want to fly to Australia to enjoy better beaches. New Zealand is seen as a premium destination.

planemanofnz wrote:

NZ321 wrote:

CZ has low fares to PVG because it doesn't fly direct and is trying to compete with NZ and MU.

Why does CZ care about PVG, but not other cities? 3U, GS and HU do not single out PVG in their pricing, even though they do not fly AKL - PVG too.

I would also point out that CZ does not fly SYD / MEL - PVG direct either, but its pricing for those routes is much higher than it is for AKL - PVG.

Cheers,

C.

I think AKL-PVG being the only route with 2 airlines on it, it's just an easy target.

PVG always comes up as a cheap destination because every airline serves it, same as PEK, it just varies who is doing it, Tianjin and Air China were the ones previously, and HU before that. CZ was looking at getting rid of 1 of the flights earlier in the year, but I'm not sure what happened to it, probably just slot protection won out. If they lose one flight, they will either lose Chinese feed or international feed due transit times.

With regard to SYD/MEL they are much bigger markets than AKL and also potentially a lot of the lustre has been lost for the Chinese buying houses here in Auckland/NZ, so they are no longer flying down on the morning CZ, going to an auction or two, buying 6-7 houses and hopping back on the evening plane the following day. It's also a big hassle to get a Chinese Visa here, to the point that NZers will just go to any of the plenty of Asian nations that they get visa-free/on arrival.

xiaotung wrote:

China has a stupid one airline one route policy so these airlines are flying the routes to prevent another from entering even if it means operating at a loss

Ex-AKL, I can understand this as the rationale for launching routes from tier-one cities, like SZX - these clearly have potential to become high-yielding in the future. However, I struggle to see why GS feels the need to launch CKG - AKL and XIY - AKL - in particular, the latter will be served 1x weekly, which must have huge crew layover costs? If GS did not operate these routes, I doubt that other carriers outside of the HNA Group would sweep in and 'steal' them. There must be something more to this.

xiaotung wrote:

For CZ, they see their hub CAN to be an important part of their transit strategy for transit pax. So the low fares not only help fill one plane, they fill two

aerorobnz wrote:

If they lose one flight, they will either lose Chinese feed or international feed due transit times

The transit hub strategy can still work with a 1x daily flight, if that flight is split (operating in the morning on some days of the week, and in the evening on other days of the week) like MH has done out of AKL, and like QR often does with European routes ex-DOH. Unless, what you're trying to say is that in isolation, the second daily AKL service is not profitable, but when viewed by its contribution to CZ's overall network, it is in fact profitable? I cannot see a NZD 459 AKL - PVG fare being worth it for CZ.

xiaotung wrote:

I think AKL-PVG being the only route with 2 airlines on it, it's just an easy target

aerorobnz wrote:

PVG always comes up as a cheap destination because every airline serves it

That does not explain why SYD - PVG and MEL - PVG are not also priced so aggressively, given that they also have multiple carriers on them.

xiaotung wrote:

a lot of the lustre has been lost for the Chinese buying houses here in Auckland/NZ, so they are no longer flying down on the morning CZ, going to an auction or two, buying 6-7 houses and hopping back on the evening plane the following day. It's also a big hassle to get a Chinese Visa here, to the point that NZers will just go to any of the plenty of Asian nations that they get visa-free/on arrival.

I am slightly confused by this:

- Are Chinese property buyers really sustaining the "morning CZ" service?
- The foreign buyer ban for domestic property has not yet been enacted?
- New Zealand has the same Chinese visa processes as Australia does?

IMO, the relative decline in Chinese visitors to New Zealand must be attributable to more than just a property market slump.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

Ex-AKL, I can understand this as the rationale for launching routes from tier-one cities, like SZX - these clearly have potential to become high-yielding in the future. However, I struggle to see why GS feels the need to launch CKG - AKL and XIY - AKL - in particular, the latter will be served 1x weekly, which must have huge crew layover costs? If GS did not operate these routes, I doubt that other carriers outside of the HNA Group would sweep in and 'steal' them.

CKG is not a small city. we are talking 30 million people in the immediate catchment and even higher when the surrounding areas are included, this is a huge opportunity and would be silly for it to be ignored, add to that it has a strong economy, is a major transport cross roads due to its central location and forms a major stop on NZ Chinese tours which have been growing significantly in the past few years as they are incredibly good value for the amount they can cram into such a short space of time. CKG along with XIY have both inbound and outbound appeal (XIY even more so with its major historical attractions), however like any long haul route they take time to mature. As for the one weekly XIY flight, GS crew are most likely based in Tianjin and will just return there via the two weekly other flights via CKG. As i've said in the past and I'll say again, we don't expect all our Australian visitors to be routed through SYD, MEL and BNE so why should we expect our Chinese equivalents to only come through PEK, PVG or CAN, when you only have maybe 1.5 weeks holiday at the most per year, every hour counts and why should they waste that waiting around airports for connecting flights when they can fly non-stop from their home cities.

As for the decline/stagnation in Chinese visitors, many factors have probably contributed to this, however I'd imagine the tightening up on those low-cost shopping trips has had probably the most impact as well as Tourism NZ's change in focus from mass tourism from this market to quality FIT's.

Also the Visa process to get to China from NZ is not difficult, fill in the forms, pay the money and send the passport to the Wellington embassy - done. No worse than completing the electronic forms required for entering the USA, and with the amount of NZers heading to China on the rise, requiring a visa does not appear to be a hindrance.

NPL8800 wrote:

CKG is not a small city. we are talking 30 million people in the immediate catchment and even higher when the surrounding areas are included, this is a huge opportunity and would be silly for it to be ignored

I do not buy this - the population size of a city does not necessarily indicate the potential of a market. For example, look at CGK and DEL, which have greater populations than CKG, and are capitals (with all of the traffic that comes with being so), but still have no flights to AKL. CKG still has no flights to the likes of CDG, FRA or SFO - these would seem to have far more potential (and thus warrant more immediate market entry to counter the 'one route per airline' policy) than a flight to AKL.

NPL8800 wrote:

CKG along with XIY have both inbound and outbound appeal

PEK has the Forbidden City, PVG has the Bund, XIY has the Terracotta Army, but what does CKG have that New Zealanders would be aware of? I do not buy into the argument that CKG has in-bound tourism appeal from the New Zealand market. Outside of PEK, PVG and XIY, I see HAK as having some in-bound tourism appeal, given its beaches, cultural heritage, and visa policies, and no doubt that is what HU thought before it announced a seasonal HAK - SYD service earlier this week.

NPL8800 wrote:

As for the decline/stagnation in Chinese visitors, many factors have probably contributed to this, however I'd imagine the tightening up on those low-cost shopping trips has had probably the most impact

Australia has far more luxury shopping options than New Zealand does, but Australia's in-bound tourism is still growing by about 18% annually.

According to some media reports, New Zealand's visa policies are to blame:

"We have changed from a multi-entry single year visa to a new five-year multi-entry visa for Chinese, so FIT travellers can now come to NZ more than once in a five year period on a multi-year visa. What happened is that they didn’t apply until that new visa became available which is why we have seen general visa numbers out of China grow 20% since that new visa was launched. But our ABS, or group visitor visas, have declined."

See: http://tourismticker.com/2017/11/21/tnz ... to-growth/.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

NPL8800 wrote:

CKG is not a small city. we are talking 30 million people in the immediate catchment and even higher when the surrounding areas are included, this is a huge opportunity and would be silly for it to be ignored

I do not buy this - the population size of a city does not necessarily indicate the potential of a market. For example, look at CGK and DEL, which have greater populations than CKG, and are capitals (with all of the traffic that comes with being so), but still have no flights to AKL. CKG still has no flights to the likes of CDG, FRA or SFO - these would seem to have far more potential (and thus warrant more immediate market entry to counter the 'one route per airline' policy) than a flight to AKL.

There are no airlines that are willing to lose money ex CGK and DEL so there are no direct flights. CKG is different. We have NHA Group who seems to be quite happy to lose money with all of their new long haul services. They have the most confusing corporate structure and seems to have access to unlimited bank loans which are close to interest free, not to mention the potential subsidies from local government.

Not too sure about Europe, but CKG not having a direct service to SFO probably is due to Chinese airlines having capped their China-US service limit.

planemanofnz wrote:

NPL8800 wrote:

CKG along with XIY have both inbound and outbound appeal

PEK has the Forbidden City, PVG has the Bund, XIY has the Terracotta Army, but what does CKG have that New Zealanders would be aware of? I do not buy into the argument that CKG has in-bound tourism appeal from the New Zealand market. Outside of PEK, PVG and XIY, I see HAK as having some in-bound tourism appeal, given its beaches, cultural heritage, and visa policies, and no doubt that is what HU thought before it announced a seasonal HAK - SYD service earlier this week.

HAK is not really a tourist friendly destination especially for foreigners. It has a bad reputation among Chinese tourists for rippling people off. Maybe the local government wants to change that but I doubt they will be successful with attracting Aussies. Attracting Kiwis to have a holiday in HAK is just as difficult as CKG.

planemanofnz wrote:

NPL8800 wrote:

As for the decline/stagnation in Chinese visitors, many factors have probably contributed to this, however I'd imagine the tightening up on those low-cost shopping trips has had probably the most impact

Australia has far more luxury shopping options than New Zealand does, but Australia's in-bound tourism is still growing by about 18% annually.

According to some media reports, New Zealand's visa policies are to blame:

"We have changed from a multi-entry single year visa to a new five-year multi-entry visa for Chinese, so FIT travellers can now come to NZ more than once in a five year period on a multi-year visa. What happened is that they didn’t apply until that new visa became available which is why we have seen general visa numbers out of China grow 20% since that new visa was launched. But our ABS, or group visitor visas, have declined."

See: http://tourismticker.com/2017/11/21/tnz ... to-growth/.

Cheers,

C.

[/quote]

Perhaps the decline with Chinese tourists to New Zealand is just a result of Australia opening up more with cheaper airfares, easier visa policy, SmartGate self process passport control, considerably more direct flights, shorter flight time, etc.

xiaotung wrote:

They have the most confusing corporate structure and seems to have access to unlimited bank loans which are close to interest free, not to mention the potential subsidies from local government.

I agree - HU's strategy seems bizarre. I wonder why it did not consolidate at SZX, in response to CA at PEK, MU at PVG and CZ at CAN.

xiaotung wrote:

CKG not having a direct service to SFO probably is due to Chinese airlines having capped their China-US service limit.

Okay, but there are still a whole host of airports that make more sense than AKL, with no flights to CKG - e.g. CDG, FRA, LHR or even YVR.

xiaotung wrote:

It has a bad reputation among Chinese tourists for rippling people off.

I can tell you that other Chinese cities have a reputation too for getting ripped off, among New Zealanders - HAK is no special case at all.

Hi all,

I am interested in everyone's thoughts on the potential for greater use of Te Reo Maori at Air New Zealand.

Here is a background to Te Reo Maori at Air New Zealand:

"We recognise Māori culture as a foundation of New Zealand's heritage and a key element of our tourism proposition. As the national carrier, we are in a unique position to embrace and share Māori culture with New Zealanders and overseas visitors. We regularly use Te Reo to greet our customers and in 2016 have improved the use of Te Reo in other ways across our business. We invested in training an initial 25 cabin crew to become ambassadors of the Māori language and culture onboard our flights, and we launched "Te Kete Tikanga Māori" - our own Māori language and culture app for employees. We have also worked with the Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori (Māori Language Commission) to introduce the "Waha Tohu," a Māori language identifier pin that can be worn by fluent Te Reo speaking New Zealanders, including Air New Zealanders."

See: https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/sustain ... evelopment.

This is a photo of the new Air New Zealand Tohu Reo pin:



There is some commercial merit in this - Maori culture is one of the top reasons why tourists come to New Zealand.

These are some ideas that I had for Air New Zealand to implement, though, I appreciate that they might be unviable:

- Pre-recorded Te Reo Maori on-board announcements, to accompany any announcements in English
- A Te Reo Maori version of the in-flight safety video, even if only for online, or with Te Reo Maori subtitles
- Maori language content in both the in-flight entertainment system, and in the 'Kia Ora' in-flight magazine
- Signage in Te Reo Maori at Air New Zealand's Koru lounges, even if just the lounges within New Zealand

Cheers,

C.

If all goes well, Samoa Airways will consider launching APW - WLG and APW - CHC at some point.

"He said if well supported the airline should be in a position at the end of its first year to acquire a second jet, allowing services to Brisbane, Melbourne, Wellington and Christchurch."

See: https://www.radionz.co.nz/international ... -says-govt.

PH used to fly APW - WLG (and, AFAIK, TBU - WLG and MEL - WLG too), before it ceased operations.

Is there potential for WLG and CHC to attract further Pacific Island flights, from say NF, SB or others?

Cheers,

C.

Some statistics have been released, regarding NZ's performance:

Year-to-date RASK: +1.7%;
Short haul: +5.4%;
Long haul: -4.0%.

See: https://blueswandaily.com/air-new-zeala ... -oct-2017/.

NZ's share of the Australian market has declined, to 6.6% in 2017.

See: https://blueswandaily.com/bitre-release ... fy2016-17/.

I am sure that NZ's team will be considering this data carefully.

Cheers,

C.

As I posted in the Australian Aviation Thread just now, Thai AirAsia X is considering flights to Australia.

I could see the carrier launching BKK - OOL - AKL, with AirAsia X moving to a non-stop KUL - AKL flight.

This would allow the AirAsia Group to retain whatever market share on OOL - AKL it has developed.

See: https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/transp ... eet-growth.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

Hi all,

I am interested in everyone's thoughts on the potential for greater use of Te Reo Maori at Air New Zealand.

Here is a background to Te Reo Maori at Air New Zealand:

"We recognise Māori culture as a foundation of New Zealand's heritage and a key element of our tourism proposition. As the national carrier, we are in a unique position to embrace and share Māori culture with New Zealanders and overseas visitors. We regularly use Te Reo to greet our customers and in 2016 have improved the use of Te Reo in other ways across our business. We invested in training an initial 25 cabin crew to become ambassadors of the Māori language and culture onboard our flights, and we launched "Te Kete Tikanga Māori" - our own Māori language and culture app for employees. We have also worked with the Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori (Māori Language Commission) to introduce the "Waha Tohu," a Māori language identifier pin that can be worn by fluent Te Reo speaking New Zealanders, including Air New Zealanders."

See: https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/sustain ... evelopment.

This is a photo of the new Air New Zealand Tohu Reo pin:



There is some commercial merit in this - Maori culture is one of the top reasons why tourists come to New Zealand.

These are some ideas that I had for Air New Zealand to implement, though, I appreciate that they might be unviable:

- Pre-recorded Te Reo Maori on-board announcements, to accompany any announcements in English
- A Te Reo Maori version of the in-flight safety video, even if only for online, or with Te Reo Maori subtitles
- Maori language content in both the in-flight entertainment system, and in the 'Kia Ora' in-flight magazine
- Signage in Te Reo Maori at Air New Zealand's Koru lounges, even if just the lounges within New Zealand

Cheers,

C.

Why? It’s bad enough having to sit through announcements in two languages and now you want to add a third when there would be at best a handful of people who would understand it?

It is great to hear that SQ Is witnessing "strong demand" out of New Zealand.

Australia and New Zealand have contributed to the improved demand landscape. SIA CFO Stephen Barnes noted, during the group’s analyst briefing to discuss the half-year results, “strong demand” from the Southwest Pacific region, despite “significantly more capacity added”.

See: https://blueswandaily.com/strong-demand ... itability/.

This comes on the back of TG noting "increasing demand" for its AKL flights.

See: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1711/S ... -trade.htm.

This is encouraging, despite new entrants like D7 and PR adding New Zealand.

I wonder what further expansion SQ might implement in New Zealand, such as:

- AKL: a second flight
- WLG: a non-stop flight
- CHC: an A350 flight

Cheers,

C.

Only a matter of time before CHC is upgraded IMHO. Agree A359 would seem obvious. 772 product into WLG is very basic compared to that offered from AKL and CHC as it uses the older regional configuration and no flatbed seat. Not holding my breath for a nonstop tho.

Kiwirob wrote:

It’s bad enough having to sit through announcements in two languages and now you want to add a third

"Bad enough?" Oh, please - overseas tourism (be it Chinese, Japanese or from anywhere else for that matter) is significant for New Zealand - announcements in other languages are not only made to enhance the overall experience for these tourists, but in some cases, are essential for facilitating compliance and understanding with safety policies.

Regarding Te Reo Maori specifically, aside from the fact that Maori culture is a huge reason as to why tourists visit New Zealand, Te Reo Maori has been an official language of New Zealand since 1987, by law (see the Maori Language Act). At the very least, IMHO, there should be some pre-recorded announcements on domestic flights.

Cheers,

C.

777ER wrote:

Here are the interesting pieces from stuff.co.nz stating G5 intentions on serving WLG

"On Sunday airport deputy chief executive Matt Clarke signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in Beijing with China State Construction Engineering Corporation (CSCEC) and airline, China Express.
.....
....
.....

China Express is a regional airline that fed hub carriers and has global ambitions to expand and would be working with the airport on new air routes to Wellington, he said.

.....
.....
.....

China Express vice president Qui Ke said the company was serious about its objectives and was confident it could achieve its job of attracting tourism"


https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/988108 ... -extension

...I don't think China Express actually fed hub carriers as of today?

That’s still no reason to have Maori language announcements on aircraft. I’d like to see the statistics on why people come to NZ, I’d put the scenery/nature/adventure tourism well above Maori culture as the prime reason.

planemanofnz wrote:

There is a good investor day presentation that shows some interesting renders and more detailed product updates https://corporate.aucklandairport.co.nz/~/media/Files/Corporate/Investors/Investor-day-2017.ashx?la=en 107 pages of fun!

What I find interesting is page 28. Qatar and Emirates have only been flying direct AKL-MiddleEast for a bit over a year and that's already 36% of the AKL-EU market. That's amazing!



I'm actually surprised at how little (relatively) traffic is flown via South East Asia. I guess that shows how the entry of EK + QR (+EY) on the Kangaroo Route has really hurt SQ + MH + TG. The reduction of AKL-Australia-MiddleEast has been very sharp, so that does explain why EK is exiting that market.

planemanofnz wrote:

I am interested in everyone's thoughts on the potential for greater use of Te Reo Maori at Air New Zealand.

I think they've struck the right balance at the moment. I actually quite like how the refer to AKL as TM.

planemanofnz wrote:

- Pre-recorded Te Reo Maori on-board announcements, to accompany any announcements in English

What's the point? How many Air New Zealand passengers speak Te Treo only and would benefit from this? I would be very surprised if there were more than a handful every year. I don't see the point of having announcements and the safety video in Maori just to impress tourists (who don't even understand it).

planemanofnz wrote:

Maori culture is one of the top reasons why tourists come to New Zealand.

Is it?

planemanofnz wrote:

I wonder what further expansion SQ might implement in New Zealand, such as:

- AKL: a second flight

What timing would work best to connect to SQ's departure banks?An early morning departure ex AKL (say 0800) would arrived in Singapore in the early afternoon (1400). You'd need a ~1500 departure from Singapore for the outbound service. Would that kind of schedule open up any beneficial connections? I guess it would be a good way to add capacity, though the departure time of the AKLSIN leg is probably a bit early to work with connections ex regional NZ. As it stands, NZ and SQ's current schedule is quite good in terms of offering flights at both ends of the day.

Hey I see that ZK-NZM is on its way home, due AKL around 9pm 23rd Nov after a non-stop flight from CHS.

I am not a proponent of mandatory learning of a language that is spoken fluently by only 3.7% of the New Zealand population, and only 21% of Maori themselves. That is so globally insignificant it isn't worth forcing it on the rest of the population, official or not, there are only 6500 or so that speak English Maori and Sign Language.
As far as NZ as an airline, it is a point of difference, and you could argue it gives some connection to their koru logo too, However, I have always been of the opinion that this should be natural and unforced to avoid it looking like a phoney gimmick.
Finally, as far as announcements/safety videos go, I think it should be in English, with subtitles of the language of destination, with the option to reverse this if selected not repeated in all the possible languages.

zkojq wrote:

I think they've struck the right balance at the moment. I actually quite like how the refer to AKL as TM.

I don't like it at all - I think it's tokenism.

Very few people that I know, even Måori, say they are going to Tåmaki Makaurau for the week-end and it has to be confusing to some overseas visitors who are booked to Auckland.

What puzzles me is - why?

I think Måori is a very interesting language, I take lessons in it, but presently the name of the city is Auckland and I dislike all this Grey Lynn PC that would have it be something else.

mariner

SQ could replace NZ on that SIN service with NZ moving to a

AKL 1000 SIN 1530
SIN 0100 AKL 1600

Connects to EZE. Weather SQ would continue the seasonal A380 or not and weather they could sustain 3 daily SQ/NZ year round I don’t no. Maybe just a summer thing initially with Nz doing the night flight in winter?

ZK-NBT wrote:

SQ could replace NZ on that SIN service with NZ moving to a

AKL 1000 SIN 1530
SIN 0100 AKL 1600

Connects to EZE. Weather SQ would continue the seasonal A380 or not and weather they could sustain 3 daily SQ/NZ year round I don’t no. Maybe just a summer thing initially with Nz doing the night flight in winter?

Or NZ could change it’s own operation to that timing and offer a same-carrier service from SIN to South America. I don’t see why it should be handed to SQ.

Have to say, the SQ European flights (departing mid-morning European time) don't connect well coming back from AKL, CHC, WEL.

The connection into NZ's SIN-AKL is pretty good, but SQ (I think they are in a JV with ANZ on these routes?) could probably pick up more market share EU-NZ with some relatively minor adjustments.

DavidByrne wrote:

ZK-NBT wrote:

SQ could replace NZ on that SIN service with NZ moving to a

AKL 1000 SIN 1530
SIN 0100 AKL 1600

Connects to EZE. Weather SQ would continue the seasonal A380 or not and weather they could sustain 3 daily SQ/NZ year round I don’t no. Maybe just a summer thing initially with Nz doing the night flight in winter?

Or NZ could change it’s own operation to that timing and offer a same-carrier service from SIN to South America. I don’t see why it should be handed to SQ.

Sorry - misread the OP!

planemanofnz wrote:

- Pre-recorded Te Reo Maori on-board announcements, to accompany any announcements in English

What's the point? How many Air New Zealand passengers speak Te Treo only and would benefit from this? I would be very surprised if there were more than a handful every year. I don't see the point of having announcements and the safety video in Maori just to impress tourists (who don't even understand it).

planemanofnz wrote:

Maori culture is one of the top reasons why tourists come to New Zealand.

Is it?

A handful every year?
Wow. Head in the sand comments like that never cease to amaze me.
I assume when you board an aircraft from another national carrier for a country with more than one official language, you would be applying the same logic?
Perhaps you don't see the point, but I've got news for you. There's other people on the plane with you and I am betting they're more open minded.

ZKOAB wrote:

Head in the sand

mariner wrote:

Grey Lynn PC

aerorobnz wrote:

phoney gimmick

I cannot say that I am not disappointed by some of these comments, but okay.

zkojq wrote:

What I find interesting is page 28. Qatar and Emirates have only been flying direct AKL-MiddleEast for a bit over a year and that's already 36% of the AKL-EU market. That's amazing!

Tourism New Zealand also has some infographs and research on this topic.

See: http://www.tourismnewzealand.com/market ... ographics/.

In particular, they note that Australian transits play a hugely important role:

- Americans: only 40% of visitors use non-stop flights - 42% come via Australia
- British: only 22% of visitors transit in HKG or SIN - 60% come via Australia
- Chinese: only 34% of visitors use non-stop flights - 51% come via Australia

I can understand the British statistics, given the EK - QF JV, but not the others.

It was also noted that for Indians, the top transit hubs are SIN (31%) and SYD (14%).

Cheers,

C.

mariner wrote:

Grey Lynn PC

I cannot say that I am not disappointed by some of these comments, but okay.

Whoa!

I haven't addressed your question of airline announcements in te reo - I wasn't responding to you, so why do you assume that I was?

The comment you have quoted was related to "Auckland" being singled out for Māori-fication. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't believe that flights to the capital are announced as Te Whanganui-a-Tara or even the simpler vernacular - Pōneke (as in Port Nick, Port Nicholson). Or is Christchurch called Ōtautahi at Air New Zealand?

The official name of our biggest city is Auckland and I think it is quite wrong - tokenism and Grey Lynn PC - for a company to try and change that. If a change is considered desirable, put it to the vote.

As for te reo generally, I raised it - here - some years ago, advocating pretty much what you have suggested and getting a similar response.

mariner

AKL - DEL is this week's "Skyscanner-anna.aero Unserved Route of Week," with NZ advised to open the route.

Skyscanner demand on this week’s unserved route shows a preference towards the Auckland end of the city pair, with a 63/37 split, so on this basis we looked at potential carriers at the New Zealand origin first. “47% of total passengers travelling to Auckland from India were originating in Delhi,” adds Singh.

The market demand is extremely buoyant – as the graph below shows, with 9.2% of the Skyscanner searches for these indirect Delhi to Auckland services converted into ticket sales – that’s more than the average 8.3% achieved for Skyscanner conversion/purchase rates for all direct routes available from either Delhi or Auckland. However, with over 420,000 annual searches, a daily service should be immediately viable for the airline selecting to start this potential city pair.

See: http://www.anna.aero/2017/11/22/del-akl ... -searches/.

This "route of the week" feature has been accurate in the past (for example, with MEL - SCL (opened by LA)).

There are a few questions to be asked:

- Would NZ's less-premium 789s have the legs to make AKL - DEL non-stop, unrestricted?
- Would AI be more likely to serve AKL as a tag from MEL and / or SYD, or non-stop?
- Would any AKL - DEL service be more suited to a seasonal or a year-round offering?

We should also ask if BOM is more suitable, given that Tourism New Zealand notes more potential visitors there.

See: http://www.tourismnewzealand.com/media/ ... apshot.pdf.

India has potential - Indian visitor arrivals grew by ~15% in the last year (to ~60,000).



Cheers,

C.

DobboDobbo wrote:

Have to say, the SQ European flights (departing mid-morning European time) don't connect well coming back from AKL, CHC, WEL.

The connection into NZ's SIN-AKL is pretty good, but SQ (I think they are in a JV with ANZ on these routes?) could probably pick up more market share EU-NZ with some relatively minor adjustments.

Yep JV between NZ/SQ on NZ-SIN. SQ used to leave AKL 2 hrs later arriving SIN 2100 for shorter European connections, they arrive 1900 now which gives a few Asian/Indian connections as well. On the return SQ’s European flights connect well as you say to the NZ service, I would have thought maybe it would be better for SQ to take that flight giving SQ the whole way Europe-AKL, and as I said NZ have a morning departure ex AKL late enough to pick up domestic connections but not to late so it’s close to the SQ flight, NZ at 1000 could then maybe see SQ push their flight back ex AKL from 1330 to 1530 for those shorter Europe connections again. Weather SQ then push the SIN-AKL back or not remains to be seen, I say that because they often like to use the same aircraft for a few days. Maybe in future something like

SQxxx AKL 0115 SIN 0640
NZ282 AKL 1000 SIN 1530
SQ286 AKL 1500 SIN 2030

SQxxx SIN 0840 AKL 2340
SQ285 SIN 2215 AKL 1300
NZ281 SIN 0130 AKL 1630

Means NZ don’t have an odd long haul arrival, they can use the same frame which helps but if it breaks it causes delays with no spare on the ground often at that time although they probably have a late SYD/MEL arrival aircraft they could use. The only thing missing is an early evening SIN departure and earlier AKL arrival say

SIN 1800 AKL 0900

According to Christchurch Airport, CZ's CHC - CAN service is "proving very popular with both Chinese visitors and South Island residents."

"Justin Watson says Christchurch is New Zealand’s fastest growing entry point for Chinese visitors and China Southern Airlines’ share of those visitors has increased from 34 per cent to 60 percent."

See: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1711/S ... -years.htm.

This is great to see - I wonder how long it will be before other Chinese airlines fly to CHC, like HU or MU ex-PVG (even if seasonally, like CI).

Cheers,

C.

India has the potential to initially be the next seasonal route, like SGN, KIX, DPS, CNS, but I am conscious how price sensitive the market is which does pose a risk for a new carrier. As a result, this market switches year to year to whichever the cheapest airline with the most luggage allowance is (You have probably seen the current SQ special with 40KG allowance}. CZ has been doing well with this market the last few years. Historically SQ has had a kind of a status/loyalty in the market (especially for the J market)might be able to be tapped into, but I think it might be quite hard to crack into without making the route unprofitable, and whether or not paying extra for direct is something that would happen or whether it cannibalises SIN and the SQ agreement remains to be seen, It is worth a seasonal punt for a year or two to test who is interested and for what price, but if the market shows little interest in the fares that NZ can sustainably offer they shouldn't try to chase the market demand with cheap fares in order to serve it

aerorobnz wrote:

India has the potential to initially be the next seasonal route, like SGN, KIX, DPS, CNS, but I am conscious how price sensitive the market is which does pose a risk for a new carrier. As a result, this market switches year to year to whichever the cheapest airline with the most luggage allowance is (You have probably seen the current SQ special with 40KG allowance}. CZ has been doing well with this market the last few years. Historically SQ has had a kind of a status/loyalty in the market (especially for the J market)might be able to be tapped into, but I think it might be quite hard to crack into without making the route unprofitable, and whether or not paying extra for direct is something that would happen or whether it cannibalises SIN and the SQ agreement remains to be seen, It is worth a seasonal punt for a year or two to test who is interested and for what price, but if the market shows little interest in the fares that NZ can sustainably offer they shouldn't try to chase the market demand with cheap fares in order to serve it

Whats the current special with SQ and 40kg baggage? Is that to all destinations in Asia and Europe?

aerorobnz wrote:

Historically SQ has had a kind of a status/loyalty in the market (especially for the J market)might be able to be tapped into, but I think it might be quite hard to crack into without making the route unprofitable, and whether or not paying extra for direct is something that would happen or whether it cannibalises SIN and the SQ agreement remains to be seen, It is worth a seasonal punt for a year or two to test who is interested and for what price, but if the market shows little interest in the fares that NZ can sustainably offer they shouldn't try to chase the market demand with cheap fares in order to serve it

It's hugely popular among the Kiwi Indians I know because from Singapore they can get to just about anywhere on the subcontinent.

I'm not sure how NZ could replicate this. As I understand it, they would be limited to one gateway - BOM? - unless that's changed in the 2016 renegotiation. Even if it is, they don't want more than one gateway city, but BOM may be on the wrong side of the country. DEL might be better, but I don't know if DEL is in the bilateral.

BOM would be fine for connections to Gujarat, maybe to the Punjab, but most other places would be a backtrack. Nothing wrong with a backtrack, but if pax can get there without one - through SIN - why would they not? This means that NZ would probably miss out on a great deal of desi - Indian diaspora - traffic, apart from Gujarati and maybe some Punjabi. Mostly, I suspect it would be almost entirely Kiwi tourists, and even they might prefer landing in Chennai, say, and continuing their journey onwards - but westward - from there. Maybe there's a way that NZ could make BOM-AKL desirable, in the same way that LAX-LHR is desirable, but I'm not sure how they'd do that.

So short of using CMB as the gateway, which I think is the most sensible way, it's a puzzlement.

mariner

GS (Tianjin Airlines) has announced a partnership with the New Zealand School of Tourism.

Last week Tianjin Airlines staff set up shop at the New Zealand School of Tourism (NZST) Auckland Airport campus, interviewing 42 of the provider’s students from around the country for potential roles as international flight attendants. Those who make the final cut will be flown to Beijing for a three-month induction programme, before starting their new jobs as cabin crew on the airline’s long-haul flights.

This is only the second time the airline has recruited outside of China, and the partnership marks its first-ever recruitment drive in Australasia.

Earlier this year, Hainan Airlines (who is one of the owners of Tianjin Airlines) - interviewed and recruited 10 international flight attendants from NZST by using a similar model of being on site. Impressed by the calibre of candidates, Tianjin Airlines decided to follow suit.

See: http://www.voxy.co.nz/business/5/298457.

This is an interesting initiative, and will hopefully commit GS (and HU) to the AKL market.

GS will launch XIY - AKL next month, and IMHO, HU should consider PVG - CHC soon, too.

Cheers,

C.

planemanofnz wrote:

ZKOAB wrote:

Head in the sand

I cannot say that I am not disappointed by some of these comments, but okay.

My comment wasn't aimed at you.
I commend you for raising the point of discussion.

planemanofnz wrote:

Hi all,

I am interested in everyone's thoughts on the potential for greater use of Te Reo Maori at Air New Zealand.

Here is a background to Te Reo Maori at Air New Zealand:

"We recognise Māori culture as a foundation of New Zealand's heritage and a key element of our tourism proposition. As the national carrier, we are in a unique position to embrace and share Māori culture with New Zealanders and overseas visitors. We regularly use Te Reo to greet our customers and in 2016 have improved the use of Te Reo in other ways across our business. We invested in training an initial 25 cabin crew to become ambassadors of the Māori language and culture onboard our flights, and we launched "Te Kete Tikanga Māori" - our own Māori language and culture app for employees. We have also worked with the Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori (Māori Language Commission) to introduce the "Waha Tohu," a Māori language identifier pin that can be worn by fluent Te Reo speaking New Zealanders, including Air New Zealanders."

See: https://www.airnewzealand.co.nz/sustain ... evelopment.

This is a photo of the new Air New Zealand Tohu Reo pin:



There is some commercial merit in this - Maori culture is one of the top reasons why tourists come to New Zealand.

These are some ideas that I had for Air New Zealand to implement, though, I appreciate that they might be unviable:

- Pre-recorded Te Reo Maori on-board announcements, to accompany any announcements in English
- A Te Reo Maori version of the in-flight safety video, even if only for online, or with Te Reo Maori subtitles
- Maori language content in both the in-flight entertainment system, and in the 'Kia Ora' in-flight magazine
- Signage in Te Reo Maori at Air New Zealand's Koru lounges, even if just the lounges within New Zealand

Cheers,

C.

Yes a lot of tourists do like a bit of Maori culture on their trip here. I would suggest however that Maori culture is not the main reason. I would also say that culture and language can be mutually exclusive especially in a tourist sense. Anything more than a basic kia ora and haere ra is a waste of Air NZs resources and is possibly at the detriment to other things as it is a distraction. On domestic services perhaps might be less of an issue since it’s not exactly full service and te reo speakers are more likely to be on board.
And please no horrible pre recorded duplication for no reason (all Maori speak and understand English - well some maybe not very well by choice. However on a small percent of a small minority speak te reo so it is pointless using it as a means of communication for an airline).