2019 Skytrax World Airline Awards: Who are the real winners?

It’s that time of the year when the airline industry is abuzz with the Skytrax World Airline Awards announced recently at the Paris Air Show.

There are surveys and there are surveys, if you know what I mean. Skytrax, which launched its survey back in 1999 (according to its website) is generally viewed with some regard. It is said that more than 21 million respondents participated in the 2019 survey.

But what can we read of the results?

Which is the real winner: Qatar Airways or Singapore Airlines?

Qatar Airways switched places with last year winner Singapore Airlines (SIA) to be the world’s best airline.

As far back as 2010 until now, the two airlines have been ranked one behind the other in the top three spots, except in 2012 when Asiana came in second place between Qatar the winner and SIA in third position. In the ten year period, SIA came behind Qatar in eight years, except in 2010 when SIA was second and Qatar third, and last year when the Singapore carrier became the world’s best ahead of Qatar in second placing.

It looks like a tight race between Qatar and SIA for the top spot, and going by the survey results, Qatar has outranked SIA. It has become the first airline to have won the award five times, one more in the history of the awards.

But SIA is still ranked ahead of Qatar for first class and economy class.

In the first class category, Qatar is not even a close second to SIA in first placing but fifth behind Lufthansa, Air France and Etihad as well

In the economy class category, Japan Airlines is tops followed by SIA and Qatar in second and third placing respectively.

Besides SIA has the best premium economy in Asia, second only to Virgin Atlantic worldwide. But,of course, Qatar does not offer that class of travel.

Additionally SIA tops for cabin crew, and Qatar is farther down the list in 9th position.

But Qatar wins for business class, followed by ANA and SIA in second and third placing respectively. So it seems there is heavier weightage for this segment which has become probably the fiercest battleground for the airlines. First class included, it also suggests the halo effect of the premium product, but it is the business class that is the primary focus in today’s business.

It also attests to the impact of the recency factor. Qatar obviously impresses with its cubicle-like Qsuite that comes with its own door to provide maximum privacy. Quad configurations allow businessmen to engage in conference as if they were in a meeting room and families to share their own private space. And there is a double bed option.

Which brings up the importance of having to continually innovate and upgrade the product to stay ahead in the race.

The top ten listing: Consistency equals excellence

The ranking does not shift much from year to year. Besides Qatar and SIA, there are some familiar names: All Nippon Airways (3rd this year), Cathay Pacific (4th), Emirates (5th), EVA Air (6th) and Lufthansa (9th). So there is not much of a big deal as airlines switch places so long as they remain in the premier list.

Hainan Airlines (7th) is making good progress, moving up one notch every year since 2017. Qantas (8th) is less consistent, moving in and out of the top ten list, Thai Airways retained its 10th spot for a second year.

It is no surprise that the list continues to be dominated by Asian carriers which are generally reputed for service. You only need to look at the winners for best cabin crew: Besides SIA, the list is made up of Garuda Indonesia, ANA, Thai Airways, EVA Air, Cathay Pacific, Hainan Airlines, Japan Airlines and China Airlines. With the exception of Qatar, no other airline outside Asia is listed.

If you to look to find out how the United States carriers are performing, scroll down the extended list of the 100 best and you will see JetBlue Airways (40th), Delta Air Lines (41st), Southwest Airlines (47th), Alaska Airlines (54th), United Airlines (68th) and American Airlines (74th).

Home and regional rivalry

Rivalry between major home airlines or among competing regional carriers is often closely watched.

Air Canada, placed 31st ahead of rival WestJet at 55th can boast it is the best in North America. That’s how you can work the survey results to your advantage.

ANA (3rd) has consistently outdone arch rival JAL (11th). In fact, ANA has been the favoured airline in the past decade till now. It has Japan’s best airline staff and best cabin crew. Across Asia, it provides the best business class. Internationally, it provides the best airport services and business class onboard catering.

Asiana (28th) is favoured over Korean Air (35th ).

The big three Gulf carriers are ranked Qatar first, followed by Emirates (5th) and Etihad (29th).

Among the European carriers, Lufthansa (9th) leads the field, followed by Swiss International Air Lines (13th), Austrian Airlines (15th), KLM (18th), British Airways (19th), Virgin Atlantic (21st), Aeroflot (22nd), Air France (23rd), Iberia (26th) and Finnair (32nd).

What about low-cost carriers?

Worthy of note is how some budget carriers are ranked not far behind legacy airlines. AirAsia (20th) is best among cohorts. EasyJet (37th) and Norwegian Air Shuttle (39th) are not far behind the big guys in Europe. Among US carriers, Southwest Airlines (47th) is third after JetBlue (40th) and Delta (41st).

Also, pedigree parents do not necessarily produce top-ranked offshoots. Placed farther down the list are SIA’s subsidiary Scoot (64th) and the two Jetstar subsidiaries of Qantas – Jetstar Airways (53rd) and Jetstar Asia (81st). So too may be said of so-called regional arms. Cathay Pacific’s Cathay Dragon is ranked 33rd, but SIA’s SilkAir is way down at 62nd.

Pioneer of the modern budget model Ryanair is ranked 59th.

Down the slippery road of decline: Aisana Airlines and Etihad Airways

If it is difficult to stay at the top, it is easy to slip down the slippery road of decline. Asiana and Etihad are two examples.

Asiana was ranked world’s best airline in 2010 and became a familiar name in the top ten list up to 2014, after which its ranking kept falling: 11th (2015), 16th (2016), 20th (2017), 24th (2018) and 28th (2019). Its erstwhile glory has been whittled down to being just best cabin crew in South Korea.

Etihad did reasonably well for eight years until 2018 when it was ranked 15th, and a year later suffered a dramatic decline to the 29th spot. That, despite beating Qatar to be this year’s best first class in the Middle East.

As I stated at the onset that there are surveys and there are surveys. Some are not specifically targeted , whether its interest is business or leisure for example. There is always an element of subjectivity and bias in the composition and weightage, and this renders no one reading as being definitive. At best, we can read across several creditable surveys to know with some conviction how the airlines really measure against each other.

Read also:

https://www.todayonline.com/commentary/can-singapore-airlines-overtake-qatar-worlds-best-airline

Advertisements

Joon’s failure re-validates old lessons

Courtesy Getty Images

In just a year after its launch, Air France is shutting down its low-cost subsidiary airline Joon which promised to carve out a new niche market among millennials. The reason, said Air France, is because the brand had been “difficult to understand from the outset.”

Strange as that may sound, it shows how a major player like Air France itself has failed to understand the market forces at play. Or, an ill-timed miscalculation of the market trend.

A little history is appropriate here. When budget travel first emerged on the scene, legacy airlines were inclined to dismiss the upstarts as unlikely competitors, believing their markets to be markedly different. The established carriers, so to speak, were not interested in the budget market and were quite happy to let low-cost operators be.

The failure of many an ambitious budget carrier supported that view, particularly at a time when the volatile fuel price moved like a yo-yo but largely trending upwards. That hit the budget carriers hard since fuel is a significant component of their cost, and cost is all that budget travel is about.

But some like Ryanair and easyJet survived the storm and made good progress. That was when the big boys decided they too wanted in on a flourishing market. A number of them set up their own budget arms, such as United Airlines’ Ted and Delta Air Lines’ Song. They didn’t last long.

As the line of competition began to blur with low-cost carriers soon attracting business away from the traditional sources, more legacy airlines carried the battle cry into the fray. Among them, British Airways which started Go, which it later sold; Singapore Airlines (SIA) which went into partnership with Ryanair to start Tigerair; and Qantas which set up Jetstar.

The budget threat heightened with low-cost carriers venturing into the long-haul. There were casualties along the way, a notable one being Oasis Airlines which flew from Hong Kong to London as well as Vancouver. Hailed as a trail blazer for good service on a shoe-string budget, it could not survive the barrage of rising costs.

But that didn’t stop others to boldly go into a domain dominated by full-service airlines, a move which many observers thought was foolhardy. Today, low-cost carriers such as Norwegian Air Shuttles, Wow! Air and AirAsia continue to rattle the hitherto safe market of the Goliaths.

It seems independent low-cost carriers are more successful than budget offshoots of legacy airlines with few exceptions such as Jetstar. Why so is this? The failure of Joon only serves to revalidate the lessons of past failures.

The overall market has shifted from one distinct full-service vs budget scenario to a common market for all airlines. For many travellers, it is a conscious choice between legacy and budget carriers, the consideration not so much in name as in value for what it costs. For many travellers, the comfort and convenience of full-service still outweigh the savings of flying budget, particularly for the long haul. But for a growing number too, despite the higher risk of flight disruptions by low-cost carriers, why not?

Studies have shown that millennials have different priorities, and the budget model of paying for only what you want may have some appeal as it means control over how you spend your money. The new and younger travellers are more adventurous and not averse to taking chances.

The shift in the market is becoming more evident in how legacy airlines are in fact no longer completely full-service as they used to be, adopting increasingly the budget pricing model in charging for ancillary services what used to be part of the package deal, such as seat selection, priority boarding, and checked baggage.

It is not a given that a successful legacy airline will be as successful in operating a budget subsidiary. On the contrary, it faces the challenge of separating the two entities to operate them on their own terms. Too often this may be compromised with the parent airline subsidising the struggling offshoot. At the same time, the parent’s product may be diluted.

Much as the parent airline likes to maintain its distance and many of them have declared that their budget offshoots are running on their own steam, the reality is far from being so. Their influence is inevitable, however indirect and unintended. That may lead to tweaking the low-cost model to be less budget and more a copy of the old block, resulting in higher costs.

This is also not helped by the expectations of the customer when the budget offshoot carries the association with the reputable parent’s brand name. For example, while SIA has earned the reputation of being one of the world’s best airline, the same could not be said of Tigerair whose customers were sadly disappointed when the carrier ran into frequent bad patches.

What can be worse is when the budget subsidiary begins to compete with the parent company for the same low-end business.

American carriers however have found a solution to that: instead of operating separate budget offshoots to compete with independent low-cost carriers, they have introduced basic economy fares with similar terms to be accommodated within the same aircraft. The practice of offering different fare types even within the same class of travel is not new, but basic economy is aimed at keeping customers who may switch to budget carriers. And the model is gaining popularity across the industry.

Some observers may think Air France’s decision to shut down Joon premature as it has not allowed the latter time to grow. But not being clear about the product or the direction it is heading, it would be a hazy road ahead. It might as well nip the problem in the bud.

Is Istanbul Airport the new Middle East hub?

Courtesy Getty Images

Turkey’s new Istanbul Airport is set to be the world’s largest airport, capable of handling up to 90 million passengers by 2021 with room for expansion to increase capacity to 200 million by 2028.

By comparison, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport in the United States – the current title holder – is capable of handling 104 million. Neigbouring Dubai International Airport has a capacity for 84 million, behind Beijing Capital International Airport’s 94 million but ahead of Haneda Airport’s 80 million, Heathrow Airport’s 76 million and Frankfurt Airport’s 61 million. (2016 figures provided by Airports Council International).

The airport was declared open on Oct 29 by Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. However, not all flights operating at the existing Ataturk Airport have been transferred to the new airport – not until the end of the year according to plans.

Mr Erdogan referred to the new airport as the “most important transit location on the north-south, east-west axes, connecting 60 countries and US$20 trillion economies”.

So, is Istanbul Airport the new Middle East hub, overtaking Dubai International?

No reason why not if you consider how geographically Istanbul is positioned not much differently from its Gulf neighbours. In fact, Istanbul, situated in a country that straddles both Asia and Europe, makes a viable alternative considering touristic interest in the region and how it is actually located on the doorstep of the wider Europe.

Already the authorities are encouraged by Istanbul’s growth of transit traffic albeit at the Ataturk Airport, and analysts are inclined to think that the new airport is likely to grow at the expense of other Middle eastern airports including Dubai, Doha and Abu Dhabi. That is, if Istanbul can ramp up the game to match what these other airports are offering in terms of cost, facilities and service. And, of course, if the volatile political climate in the region can be contained.

The competition will be fierce.

It cannot be denied the Gulf airports have been growing in tandem with that of their home airlines – Dubai/Emirates Airlines, Abu Dhabi/Etihad Airways, and Doha/Qatar Airways. Turkey’s national carrier, Turkish Airlines, is no small player. It operates scheduled services to 304 destinations in Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas, making it the largest carrier in the world by number of passenger destinations, serving more destinations non-stop from a single airport than any other carrier in the world.

However, Turkish is ranked 18th in the 2018 Skytrax survey of the world’s top airlines, behind Emirates (4th) and Etihad (15th). But that’s still ahead of some major European carriers including KLM (19th), Air France (25th) and British Airways (31st).

Right now, Ataturk Airport is the 11th busiest airport in the world in terms of total passenger traffic and the 10th busiest in the world in terms of international passenger traffic. As of 2017, it is Europe’s 5th busiest airport after London Heathrow, Paris Charles de Gaulle, Frankfurt Airport and Amsterdam Schiphol Airport. The new airport, larger and capable of providing better facilities, should not fare any worse off.

2018 Skytrax airline awards: Largely the same winners

Top airlines remain largely the same ones as last year’s.

Yet again we note how the top ten airlines remained largely the same ones as last year’s. If you’re good, you’re good, so it seems, and consistency won the day.

Singapore Airlines (SIA) which was second last year switched places with last year’s winner Qatar Airways. All Nippon Airways (ANA) and Emirates Airlines held steady in 3rd and 4th position. Cathay Pacific moved down one rung to 6th,, exchanging places with EVA Air. Lufthansa held its 7th position. Garuda Indonesian followed Hainan Airlines up one notch to 8th and 9th position respectively. The only new entrant to the list was Thai Airways International, which actually only moved up one rung from 11th last year, edging out Etihad Airways as it fell from 8th to 15th position.

So much for the excitement as the winning airlines, going by the result of the survey, continued to please their customers who found no reason to think otherwise of them.

Unlike some high-brow surveys whose results lean heavily on the premium class, Skytrax does readings across all classes.

Best for First Class was SIA followed by Etihad and Air France. This used to be the realm of Asian and Middle-East carriers, and let it not be a surprise to see two European carriers in the ranking. Lufthansa took 4th place.

Best for Business Class was Qatar followed by SIA and ANA. You would imagine that if an airline is good in First, it should not be too far off in Business. However, Air France was not placed in the top ten list and Lufthansa ranked 8th.

Best for Premium Economy was Air New Zealand followed by Qantas and SIA. It looks like the Pacific airlines are pretty good with this product. Lufthansa and Air France ranked 4th and 5th.. There was an absence of Middle-east carriers because they didn’t believe in such a class. Qatar chief CEO Akbar Al Baker had said: “We won’t roll out premium economy… I don’t think there is room for premium economy in our region, and of course in Qatar Airways. We give you a premium economy seat with an economy class price.” Sounds familiar if you recall the early days when SIA too expressed the same skepticism. However, Emirates has said its new Airbus A380 expected to be delivered in 2020 will feature premium economy.

Courtesy Star Alliance

Best for Economy Class was Thai Airways followed by SIA and Qatar. This category was dominated by Asian carriers with the exception of Lufthansa in 9th position.

Only these six airlines were placed in all three categories of First, Business and Economy (excluding premium Economy since not all airlines offer this sub-class): ANA, Cathay, Emirates, Lufthansa, Qatar and SIA. You can then rest comforted that whatever class you travel with these airlines, you will be treated without discrimination.

But is the Skytrax survey a good guide in choosing which carrier to fly with? Generally people can agree on makes a good airline. What matters when you travel with an airline? For the long haul, seat comfort is an important feature. Inflight entertainment, if you look for some distraction and are not otherwise doing something else or trying to catch up on shuteye. A good meal, if you are not one who will not eat airline food no matter what (unfortunately this is not featured in the Skytrax survey). Cabin cleanliness, of course, and that includes the condition of the washrooms. How often do you see the crew give it a clean-up and spraying some kind of deodorant to try and make it as pleasant as it possibly can be? Above all, the service provided by the cabin crew, to be treated in a friendly manner and with respect. Not forgetting service on the ground in the event that you may need assistance, as when your bag is damaged or has not arrived with you.

Perhaps the ranking for some of these more specific services may be of some help:

Best Economy seat (First and Business should be way better anyway): 1st Japan Airlines, 2nd SIA and 3rd Thai Airways.

Best cabin crew: 1st Garuda, 2nd SIA and 3rd ANA.

Best inflight entertainment: 1st Emirates, 2nd SIA and 3rd Qatar.

Cleanest cabin: 1st ANA, 2nd EVA and 3rd Asiana Airlines.

Best airport service: 1st EVA, 2nd ANA and 3rd Cathay.

But, of course, you can’t expect a single airline to be best in all categories, but you get a pretty good idea of where they all stand, perhaps with exceptions.

Much Ado About China’s Geography

Since the United States (USA) have recognized the one-China policy (following a resolution of the United Nations in the early 1970s that legitimized the sole representation of the People’s Republic of China), it would appear groundless, even against logic, that it should protest the Chinese demand for US carriers to reflect Taiwan as a Chinese territory (this applies also to the autonomous regions of Hong Kong and Macau) on their websites.

While many airlines including British Airways, Air France, Lufthansa and Singapore Airlines have reflected the change in their booking itnerfaces to comply with the ruling, US carriers – United Airlines, American Airlines and Delta Air Lines – have yet to agree, apparently at the urging of the Trump administration. But China is not budging while extending the deadline from May 25 to July 25, at the same time rejecting the US request to discuss the issue.

It may be said that there’s a fine line between politics and business, that it is difficult to separate the two. Yet it seems only expected that any company that wishes to engage in business with a country should respect its sovereignty. A way out – even if it means turning a blind eye – is to recognize the independence of business operations, that the decision of the airlines concerned is purely commercial.

So it is with Qantas, which has decided to comply with Beijing’s request after the initial resistance. As with the USA, the Australian government, while embracing the one-China policy, was critical of the Chinese ruling, but conceded that how Qantas structured its website was a matter for the company. Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said: “Private companies should be free to conduct their usual business operations free from political pressure of governments.”

So, will US carriers comply or be prepared to stop flying to China?

Why would IAG be interested in acquiring Norwegian Air Shuttle?

Courtesy Norwegian Air Shuttle

The International Airlines Group (IAG)’s interest in acquiring a stake in Norwegian Air Shuttle reflects the rising threat of the budget long-haul. Norwegian is among the few budget carriers that have broken the barriers to take budget operations beyond the limits of the 4-hour convention.

The competition is felt especially on the trans-Atlantic routes, where Norwegian and WOW air have made waves and which in turn have spawned budget offshoots by European legacy airlines, among them Lufthansa’s Eurowings, Air France’s Joon and British Airways (BA)’s Level as well as caused some carriers on both sides of the pond to introduce basic economy fare on their flights.

In fact, IAG which owns BA, Iberia and Aer Lingus, already has a Spanish budget arm known as Vueling. Yet why would it be interested in acquiring Norwegian?

Let’s face it: A legacy airline’s budget offshoot is understandably never quite like an independent budget operator. Otherwise the like of Level should have no fear of the competition posed by the like of Norwegian. Unfortunately the influence of the parent airline, however unintended, may be hard to disguise, and this could be the hitch.

Apparently IAG had already acquired a minority 4.6% stake in Norwegian. And if IAG seeks to increase its interest in the budget long-haul carrier, it may be seen as an attempt to “normalize” the playing field by the rules of the big guys. It would be a dent in the competition, if not eliminating a threat, at least limiting its influence.

What defines a best airline?

What defines a best airline, considering the different surveys that rank them? Conde Nast Travel has just released its readers’ choice of the best in 2017, and it is no surprise the list is made up of Asian, Middle East, European and SW Pacific carriers.

Courtesy Air New Zealand

Of course, it depends on the readership, but recognizing that, it also points to what really makes these airlines stand out. It is clear that the premium class service weighs heavily – the seat comfort and the fine food.

Etihad Airways (ranked #16) offers “the future of first-class comfort: a three-room “residence” with a bedroom, private bath with shower, and lounge.” Emirates (#4) offers “posh perks for premium fliers – cocktail lounges, in-flight showers… part of the reason it scores so high among travellers.” And the suites on Singapore Airlines (#3) offer “a pair of fully flat recliners that can be combined into a double bed.”

Mention is made of the premium economy class in almost all the ranked airlines” KLM (#20), Lufthansa (#19), Japan Airlines (#17), All Nippon Airways (#13), Qantas (#12), Cathay Pacific (#10), Virgin Atlantic (#7), Virgin Australia (#6), Singapore Airlines (#3) and Air New Zealand (#1).

So it may appear to be the voice of the premium travellers that is being heard. Maybe coach travellers aren’t too concerned about the ranking, more driven by price and less frilly factors, although to be fair, the Conde Nast report did mention of at least one airline, i.e. Etihad Airways (#16), not ignoring “those sitting in the back.” While many travellers may resign to the belief that the economy class is about the same across the industry, it is reasonable to assume that an airline that strives to please its customers in the front cabins will most probably carry that culture or at least part of it to the rear.

Although you may draw consensus across many of the surveys, it is best best to treat each one of them in isolation. It is more meaningful to try and draw intra conclusions within the findings of the particular survey.

You will note in the Conde Nast findings, there is an absence of American (including Canadian) carriers, never mind that of African and South American carriers.

Asiana Airlines (#8) is ranked ahead of Korean Air (#11).

All Nippon Airways (#13) is ranked ahead of Japan Airlines (#17). V

Virgin Australia (#6) is ranked ahead of Qantas (#12).

The order of the “Big 3” Gulf carriers is as follows: Qatar Airways (#2), Emirates (#4) and Etihad Airways (#16).

Of European carriers, there is the conspicuous absence of the big names of British Airways (compare Virgin Atlantic #7) and Air France, and the pleasant surprise of Aegean Airlines (#9) while SWISS seems to be regaining its erstwhile status years ago as being the industry standard.

The best belongs to Air New Zealand as the quiet achiever.

Ultimately, the results also depend on the group of respondents whose experiences may be limited to certain airlines.

Other airlines ranked in the top 20 of the Conde Nast survey: Finnair (#14), Turkish Airlines (#15), EVA Air (#18).