Cathay Pacific Expansion

CXRules · Post by **CXRules** » 06 Jul 2006, 22:55

It's basically a Boeing's view versus Airbus' view of what airlines are looking for. For Cathay Pacific, Boeing's view is more accurate, and that is more frequencies connecting different destinations through the HKG hub. Another words, CX wants more frequencies instead of larger plane to fly once a day. A380 is simply too big at the moment, and there aren't that many routes it can use it for. A new type of plane requires quite a bit of money on training, spare parts, etc. At this point, especially A380 has yet to fly commercially, Cathay is in a wait-and-see attitude. The B777-300ER confirmed CX's superhub strategy.

For example, CX prefers to have 3 times a day to LAX and 4 times a day to LHR and 2 daily to SYD and eventually Auckland, not just a daily fleet or two. More connections allow passengers to choose their prefer time of departure/arrival.

Here's the newest B747-400F silver bullet: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1070384/M/

RC20 · Post by **RC20** » 07 Jul 2006, 03:28

DFW wrote:Interesting that they wouldn't wait a little longer for the more efficient 747-8F. It's a indication that freight service is exploding and capacity is the priority right now.

CP has a policy of never taking new aircraft. In the past when they did, they got burned, as all new aircraft have teething issues. They feel any efficiencies from the latest models are more than negated by the problems and their associated costs.

Knowing CPs policy, it makes perfect sense. They get a proven reliable aircraft, which is going out of production, so they took the last ones.

CXRules · Post by **CXRules** » 07 Jul 2006, 04:39

RC20: You're correct on that point as well. Cathay's management is conservative and intelligent. That's why they make money every year in the past 35-40 years except 2-3 of them.

Question: Is the Dragonair purchase too expansive? http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_deta ... r=20060707

SN30952 · Post by **SN30952** » 07 Jul 2006, 06:42

CXRules wrote:Question: Is the Dragonair purchase too expansive?

I do not see this as an expansion, CXRules. It is rather chinese to buy a competitor so to kill competition. What ever the price may have been, it includes the killing of a competitor and an airline.

This modus operandi happens quite often in the Far East, remember some recent Korean turpitudes of the gernre.

CX · Post by CX » 07 Jul 2006, 08:09

Not really, i think it is just because they coudln't get the Mainland routes themselves..

And, there must be very high capacity routes that they might want A380s in their fleet.. yes i don't think they'll order any in the near future, but if it proves to be OK after it begins service with SIA, they will order it! If HKG is a superhub, chances are you might have flights through HKG from the mainland to some extremely popular places, like Sydney...

Advisor · Post by **Advisor** » 07 Jul 2006, 08:45

CXRules wrote:RC20: You're correct on that point as well. Cathay's management is conservative and intelligent. That's why they make money every year in the past 35-40 years except 2-3 of them.

Question: Is the Dragonair purchase too expansive? http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_deta ... r=20060707

This statement i strongly agree

CXRules · Post by **CXRules** » 08 Jul 2006, 00:44

SN30952 wrote:
CXRules wrote:Question: Is the Dragonair purchase too expansive?
I do not see this as an expansion, CXRules. It is rather chinese to buy a competitor so to kill competition. What ever the price may have been, it includes the killing of a competitor and an airline.

This modus operandi happens quite often in the Far East, remember some recent Korean turpitudes of the gernre.

Acquisition is certainly one of the many ways to expand one's business; thus, certainly it's an expansion of Cathay's businesses. Cathay and Dragonair don't have much overlap in network, only a handful of destinations are (Beijing, Xiamen, Taipei, Bangkok, and Tokyo, that's all!) Sure, it reduced a competitor, but it's not as serious as you might think. The main reason to buy Dragonair is to gain greater access to the Mainland market. For political reason, CX has been denied such access for a while. In fact, JAL, KAL, and SIA each has more Chinese destinations and flights to China than CX right now.

SN30952 · Post by **SN30952** » 08 Jul 2006, 07:45

CXRules wrote:The main reason to buy Dragonair is to gain greater access to the Mainland market. For political reason, CX has been denied such access for a while.

I agree with you CXRules, not only because every medal has two faces...

CXRules · Post by **CXRules** » 21 Jul 2006, 23:16

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... refer=asia

CXRules · Post by **CXRules** » 21 Jul 2006, 23:25

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/07/19/ ... scol20.php

CX · Post by CX » 22 Jul 2006, 02:51

It is common sense that Hong Kong Air Cargo will fight because they're going to lose half their sales, but i mean Cathay, an airline which Hong Kong should be proud of, are not allowed to make their own cargo terminals? Sometimes i just find today's economics weird, how come I need to get approval for not using your stuff, and building my own stuff to use? just to keep you alive?

CXRules · Post by **CXRules** » 30 Aug 2006, 02:35

Cathay Pacific celebrated the delivery of its 100th aircraft with a special livery.

http://www.cathaypacific.com/cpa/en_HK/ ... 0011d21c39____

CXRules · Post by **CXRules** » 31 Aug 2006, 01:54

Here are the better pictures:

CXRules · Post by **CXRules** » 31 Aug 2006, 02:47

Interesting report here: http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_deta ... r=20060831

Sounds like Cathay is not going to order any more aircraft for couple years....

Sorry, I screw up the links of the pics:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1101705/M/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1101676/M/

airmemphis · Post by **airmemphis** » 01 Sep 2006, 16:28

Any news of CX's plan to serve CAI?

CXRules · Post by **CXRules** » 02 Sep 2006, 05:16

I have not heard anything about CX to start Cairo service. They've tried to establish Istanbul, and that didn't work out very well.

ryanCX · Post by **ryanCX** » 08 Sep 2006, 10:00

Cathay's acquisition of Dragonair can be more than just a kill-the-comepetition move. Dragonair has a large presence in China already, one even Cathay would find hard to better by taking on the market by itself with its all-wide body fleet.
What they can do is paint some of the Dragonair owned A330s to Cathay colours and refit them with Cathay seats and fly them to PEK and PVG with both CX and KA codes.
Cathay would also benefit hugely from Dragonair's network in China by connecting them to its own via HKG.

As for new routes, I think Chicago would be an ideal new destination mostly because of the large presence of AA there.

CXRules · Post by **CXRules** » 27 Sep 2006, 20:43

return to shanghai

http://www.cathaypacific.com/cpa/en_HK/ ... 0010d21c39____

CX · Post by CX » 28 Sep 2006, 11:12

CXRules wrote:return to shanghai

http://www.cathaypacific.com/cpa/en_HK/ ... 0010d21c39____

Only one flight per day? Or is DragonAir still running the same service?

And, A330-300 seems fine (even though I thought a 773 would be a more probable plane since it should be quite high volume), but A343??? What the hell?? using A343 to fly a <4 hour flight when an A333 can do it??

CXRules · Post by **CXRules** » 21 Mar 2007, 17:10

Cathay is flying its own plane to Shanghai once a day, but it is code-sharing with Dragonair on that route, so technically is a whole lot more if you include the Dragonair flights, which is about 16 flights a day.

On other news, Cathay and Air China are seeking approval from the Chinese authority to start a new joint venture cargo carrier based in Shanghai. Looks like they will actually do this joint venture that they first agreed during the selling of Dragonair to Cathay last year.

http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_deta ... r=20070321

Aviation24.be

Cathay Pacific Expansion

Turpitudes of the gernre.