SQ to get competiton ex-MAN for flights straight to APAC region

[MAN Flyer]

Yeah but surely the reason why they don't operate a daily direct is because there isn't enough demand in a week (benefit vs fuel cost)? I've only flown the route once but from reading TRs I get the impression the premium demand seems to come more out of MUC.

I somehow think you missed the point of what was being said regarding it previousy operating daily nonstop and CX starting a new nonstop service, but never mind.

As for the comment about all the premium demand coming from MUC, it's strange you should say that as the last time I flew SQ328, which was a few weeks ago, there was only three people in F, and they were all going to MAN. MUC should get better demand as that flight doesn't stop. I could give a few more examples or explanations over the decade or so I've been flying the route but I'll leave it at that.

[Unionruler]

I somehow think you missed the point of what was being said regarding it previousy operating daily nonstop and CX starting a new nonstop service, but never mind.

As for the comment about all the premium demand coming from MUC, it's strange you should say that as the last time I flew SQ328, which was a few weeks ago, there was only three people in F, and they were all going to MAN. MUC should get better demand as that flight doesn't stop. I could give a few more examples or explanations over the decade or so I've been flying the route but I'll leave it at that.

All valid points, I think I see what you are trying to say now. My sincere apologies if I offended you.

[MAN Flyer]

All valid points, I think I see what you are trying to say now. My sincere apologies if I offended you.

I can assure you I was not in any way offended by a post on an internet travel forum, and nor should you be.

[FN-GM]

Just done a quick lookup for flights from BNE > MAN. It will take 40 hours + so SQ is quicker. It would be quicker going with CX via LHR than direct to MAN. Disappointed - Although J is considerably cheaper.

[sqdazz]

Just done a quick lookup for flights from BNE > MAN. It will take 40 hours + so SQ is quicker. It would be quicker going with CX via LHR than direct to MAN. Disappointed - Although J is considerably cheaper.

Where are you getting that from? Depart BNE 0925, into HKG at 1805 (there is a stop in CNS sadly), then its a 7 hour wait for the 13 hour flight to MAN. It's about 30 hours total. Not ideal since there is a long wait in HKG because there is at present no afternoon departure to HKG from BNE. Its better timing wise ex-SYD or ex-MEL at about 25 hours including transit

[FN-GM]

On the days i want there is no CX146 just CX156 that would make it 40 hours. Does CX146 not run every day?

[MAN Flyer]

I thought they may have started early as there was a full pax CX 744 on the tarmac at MAN when I landed yesterday, but it is just clearing it's formalities before heading to Bruntingthorpe for scrapping apparently.

[MAN Flyer]

It does sometimes get 'stuck' a little on the MAN turnaround. SQ328 is usually fine into MUC, and usually good getting away to MAN. ( Going OT for a moment, watching the crew change in MUC on SQ328 if in rows 1 to 4 is probably my favourite SQ pastime at the moment ). But it can get caught up on the turnaround. It shouldn't do, as it rarely has more than 150 pax ex-MAN but they hit MAN at peak arrival and departure time and as SQ use T2 they have to deal with an absolute p*sstake of a taxi system to get there and back with a ridiculous bottleneck around pier C at T1, which can regularly leave you waiting. They also go remote every Wednesday as well which means bussing everyone in and out.

Met my Mother off SQ328 this morning, as has been the case when I have flown it recently they were in early ( 07:24 arrival for 07:50 scheduled ) but had to wait for the gate to come free. Still early in though. The flight being a 77W means it has to use Gate 204 or 206 ( IIRC ) so anyone on those and they are stuck. I believe when the CX service starts in December they will 'share' 204 and 206 with CX in first they will unload and get towed remote, SQ will then arrive and depart before CX gets towed back to the gate for her 12:00 departure.

ETA, and I have just watched SQ327 go from the Aspire lounge in T1 about twenty minutes late.

[Dobbo]

FAO: MANFlyer (and I daresay others)

I have an update on the route performance of CX and SQ Ex MAN in 2015. Suffice to say SQ does not come out too well, but considering the factors at play against the current SQ operation I feel there is much to be optimistic about for the future.

I should be clear that these figures are credited to "Scottie Dog" (SSC) and my understanding is that they are based upon the official CAA figures for the relevant period. This means that they include direct routes from MAN to the destination, they do not include indirect routes (e.g. MAN-DXB-SIN). In the case of MAN, only one airline service HKG and SIN directly and so calculations can be undertaken reasonably easily. It does not include PAX from MAN-MUC carried by SQ but does include PAX ex MAN who transfer at SIN.

(Hope that is all clear?!!)

SQs performance

In 2015 SQ carried 108,950 PAX from MAN-SIN. This is up 5,998 from 2014 (102,962). Based on a daily frequency, this works out at roughly 150PAX per flight (i.e. 300 per day). Although It has not been used for the entire period under review, if it had been, a 4 class B77W (268 seats) you are looking at a load factor of around 56%.

By way of historical comparison, in 2005 SQ carried 161,671. Over the past decade there has been a drop of 52,721.

This is disappointing. The overall market from MAN has not dropped (it did dip from the GFC) and long haul routes from MAN generally are booming. So what can be done to improve this? Fortunately, CX have provided the template for SQ to follow.


CX performance

In 2015 CX carried 124,172 PAX from MAN to HKG. This was the routes first full year of operations. It was 4x weekly on a 3 class B77W (no F) with 340 seats.

Based on this, they carried roughly 298 PAX per flight, representing a load factor of 88%. CX have been reportedly delighted with this, and want to make the route 8x weekly either with the B77W or A359. Crewing issues have frustrated that until 2017.

The non-stop element has been cited as a key factor in this success, but they have also code shared with a feeder airline into MAN and the departure time (12 noon ish) permits those connections. HKG is also an obscenely strong market for the UK in general.


Is there hope for SQ?

I think yes. The main issue facing SQ is that they are offering a stopping service which brings them into direct competition with a huge number of airlines, including the ME3, TK, BA, Swiss, KLM etc. This is irrespective of whether SIN is the O/D as for places like Australia or NZ (I.e. The major market) SQ essentially offer a two stop service whereas the ME3 offer a 1 stop).

Taking SIN on its own as a sector, the scheduled journey time for SQ MAN-SIN is 14:55. Without the stop it would likely be around 13:00. By comparison from MAN-SIN you are looking at the following connecting journey times:

Via AMS with KL: 15:00
Via LHR with BA: 15:05
Via FRA with SW: 15:15
Via ZRH with SW: 15:20
Via DOH with QR: 15:25
Via DXB with EK : 15:55

I have no figures to hand for EH or TK but they are not likely to be too far off this.

In summary, despite the serious competition faced by SQ and the relatively uncompetitive journey time and departure/connection options (in particular offering a two stop kangaroo service) they do very well from MAN, and over half of the plane on the MUC-SIN sector is travelling ex MAN despite the issues above. As an example of the competition, EK report that SIN is in their top 10 connections Ex MAN.

My feeling is that it can standalone on a daily basis using an A350. Making this change is likely to result in a significant boost to PAX numbers, particularly if it uses a brand new type of aircraft.

Of more concern to SQ, may be the MUC route. Could it standalone?

Happy to hear feedback and I hope this was of interest.


Dobbo

[SQ025]

Some thoughts came into my mind:

- Would SQ currently enough airframes to separate MAN from MUC and offer direct flights from both destinations?

- In order to make a separation work, initially it might mean a reduction in frequency (MAN possibly 3/7; MUC 5/7) to make it work. Would it help to increase passenger numbers?

- Are HKG and SIN comparable? I assume that MAN-HKG has more point-to-point potential.

- The flight duration/connections might not be priority for the majority of travelers. First people would look at the price.

[Dobbo]

Hi SQ025

I may not be best placed to respond to all of your thoughts, but I'll do my best! Taking your thoughts in turn:

- probably not. I don't know whether the fleet is due to expand or not but I'm sure there are people on here who could let us know. Crew availability is also likely to be a problem.

- you may be right that a reduction in frequency (or another tag on) would need to occur to make it work. Obviously we do not know the level of premium demand from those figures, but gross passenger numbers suggest that more PAX originate from MAN despite being at the wrong end of the tag on. It is reasonable to believe that De-linking would be more likely lead to a spike in demand from MAN than MUC as it reduces journey time by around two hours.

- I suspect HKG is a slightly larger market, but generally from the UK I think Hong Kong and Singapore are pretty much neck and neck.

- the price of the options I set out were at a similar level, per Skyscanner, when I checked. Some similar options were more expensive but that can be down to a number of factors. The point I was trying to make is that SQ face a lot of competition on the MAN-SIN route, all of whom offer similar journey times and prices "one stop" on a MAN-SIN sector (including SQ). In addition, The competition generally offer "one stop" on the very popular kangaroo route whereas SQ is "two stop". I suspect most of SQs PAX ex MAN would be connecting and this hurts PAX numbers.

[SQ228]

One factor in SQ's favour with MUC is that they are the only airline flying non-stop between the two cities since LH pulled its direct flights about 3 years ago. LH has just entered into some kind of stronger joint venture with SQ (details of this others could explain better than me) so it remains possible that LH could codeshare a direct standalone SQ flight. I believe the JV includes revenue sharing. LH still uses MUC as a hub, unlike DUS where they have transferred virtually all operations to EW.

Since LH pulled its direct flight, SQ has been able to charge higher prices and seats have filled far quicker than they had in the past. I find it hard to get a good price MEL-MUC than I do for MEL-ZRH for example. LH's withdrawal also put an end to the 6x weekly SQ328/7 operations in low season. Ever since it has been daily.

[Dobbo]

My feeling is that there is probably a market for both SQ and CX to run a daily standalone operation, but it is tough with the level of competition from the ME3. By way of comparison EK carried 861k to DXB, EH carried 431k to AUH and QR carried 293k to DOH in 2015 from MAN. These all grew between roughly 40-60k as against 2014 figures and are expected to grow again in 2016. I'd be surprised if more than 30% of those PAX had DXB/AUH/DOH as their destination/origin.

I'd like to see SQ try it again but as has been pointed out there are a variety of factors that might stop it for now.

[FN-GM]

CX have gone daily to MAN.

http://www.aircargonews.net/news/air...-december.html

[Dobbo]

It's puzzling how CX has managed to perform so much better than SQ at MAN.

Some of the balance might be reversed now that MAN-SIN is non-stop and on A359, but I find it hard to think SQ could go daily on a SIN-MAN terminator.

There is already chatter about CX going to 10x weekly, whether that happens remains to be seen, but it would be tough for SQ to see a regional rival steal such a March at one of its core european routes without doing anything in response.