Asian airports dominate Skytrax best rankings

Courtesy Changi Airport Group

Not surprising that Singapore Changi clinched Skytrax’s 2017 Best Airport award for the fifth year running, commended for having the best leisure activities. As a hub airport, it is how best travellers are relieved of the stress of travel that will garner an airport favourable ratings. Changi is a favourite transit airport with its array of amenities, restaurants and shops.

What else can we infer from the survey said to be based on 13.82 million responses from 105 different nationalities, conducted from July 2016 to Feb 2017?

The top spots are held by familiar names of the last five to six years – Incheon International (3rd), Munich (4th), Hong Kong International (5th), Munich (4th), Zurich (8th) and London Heathrow (9th).

Incheon was ranked the best airport in 2012 before Changi took over in 2013, and until this year, it was a close second.

Special mention should be made of London Heathrow, which was the world’s busiest airport for international traffic until Dubai took the honours from it for two years now – Dubai did not make it to the list as being among the best.

It would appear that performance consistency is key, yet stagnation can lead to one losing the competitive edge. Changi has always prided itself as being innovative, constantly upgrading and expanding its facilities.

Making strides are Tokyo Haneda (2nd) and Doha’s Hamad International (6th). Tokyo Haneda was ranked 9th in 2013, 5th in 2015, 4th last year and 2nd this year. Hamad entered the top ten list at the bottom last year and made it up to 6th this year.

Besides Tokyo Haneda, there is a second Japanese airport in the list, namely Centrair Nagoya (7th). Tokyo Narita and Kansai Osaka were also ranked in previous years. It does say a lot about Japanese airport management.

It is no surprise that four Japanese airports are ranked among the top ten cleanest airports – Tokyo Haneda (1st), Centrair Nagoya (3rd), Tokyo Narita (5th) and Kansai Osaka (9th). Except for Zurich (8th) and Hamad (10th), this list is dominated by Asian airports, the others being Incheon (2nd), Taiwan’s Taoyuan (4th), Changi (6th) and Hong Kong (7th).

Similarly, the best airport staff service list is made up of nine Asian airports with the exeption of Vienna (10th): Taoyuan (1st), Incheon (2nd), Tokyo Haneda (3rd), Changi (4th), Centrair Nagoya (5th), Kansai Osaka (6th), Kuala Lupur International (7th), Tokyo Narita (8th) and Hong Kong (9th). Clearly service is an Asian strength.

One other Asian airport deserves some mention as the most improved airport – Jakarta’s Soekarno-Hatta Airport. Will it make it to the list as one of the world’s best?

By bow you have noticed that no airport outside Asia, the Middle East and Europe are listed in this year’s Skytrax top ten/ The only outsider was Vancouver International which was ranked 9th in 2012, 8th in 2013 and 9th in 2014. Yet again, this does not come as a surprise.

Advertisements

Singapore Changi is world’s best airport according to Conde Nast

Courtesy Alamy

Courtesy Alamy

IT is no surprise that Singapore Changi is voted yet again the world’s best airport by readers of Conde Nast. The airport has long been a darling of transit travellers, particularly those who needed a refreshing break for recharge on a long haul or those who wanted to waste no time in connecting to their final destination

If you consider Conde Nast readers’ choice of the top ten airports, Changi gets top marks for its facilities and amenities which contribute to its ideal of being a destination in itself, complete with indoor gardens and a waterfall, open-air decks and variety of restaurants, numerous shops, various lounges for all classes of travellers, a swimming pool and even a free 24-hour cinema. There are also quite nap areas to catch forty winks.

Little wonder that Qatar’s Hamad International (ranked 3rd), Dubai International (5th) and Hong Kong International (6th) are also noted for their shops and lounges. Hamad International has a hotel inside the terminal, which is a boon for travellers with long layovers needing to rest for half or a full day. Dubai International is the world’s third busiest airport but number one in terms of international travellers, and is long known to have the world’s biggest duty-free shop.

A wide network and quick connections are significant features of these airports. Hong Kong International, for example, is a popular regional hub with connections to some 50 destinations in China. This airport is often ranked as one of the top three airports in the region along with Changi and Seoul International, which took second place in the Conde Nast survey.

Proximity to the city and quick access seem to also swing the decision of Conde Nast readers in the airport’s favour.  Tokyo Haneda (8th) is only a 13-minute ride via rail to the city, compared to Narita. It s popularity has increased with more direct services offered by both Japanese and American carriers between Japan and the US. Denmark’s Copenhagen Airport is also a short ride of 12 minutes via train from the airport. And if you are travelling to or from Canada’s Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport (4th), it is an even shorter 6-minute walk via a pedestrian tunnel.

Other airports ranked in the top ten by Conde Nast are Helsinki Airport (9th) and Zurich Airport (10th).

Cathay Pacific losing grip of China card

Courtesy Cathay Pacific

Courtesy Cathay Pacific

Cathay Pacific reported plunging profits of 82 per cent for half-year results up to 30 June. Revenue fell 9.2 per cent to HK$45.68 billion (US$569 million). For an airline that had boasted record margins in previous reports, it demonstrates the volatility of the airline business today in spite of the continuing low fuel prices.

While Cathay chairman John Slosar put the blame on competition and the slowdown of the China economy – what’s new, indeed? – it is worthy of note that Cathay also suffered hedging losses in the spot market. Many airlines are apt to extol their ability to gain from fuel hedging but will remain reticent when the reading goes awry.

Mr Slosar said: “The operating environment in the first half of 2016 was affected by economic fragility and intense competition.” Apparently premium economy, which since its introduction has been Cathay’s pride, and the long hauls were not performing to expectations, confronted by competition from Middle East carriers Emirates Airlines, Qatar Airways and Etihad Airways, and from China carriers such as Air China and China Eastern which are offering direct flights thus doing away with the need for Chinese travellers to fly through Hong Kong.

Competition from foreign carriers in a reciprocally open market is to be expected, and which may be augmented by those carriers offering an improved product. Cathay’s main woe is probably the falling China market on two counts: the reduced demand for premium travel and the diversion away from Hong Kong as the gateway to the region. Cathay and Hong Kong International Airport have benefitted from the growing China market, but while it was able to prevent Qantas from setting up Jetstar Hong Kong, it can do little to stem the growth of China carriers.

Courtesy Singapore Airlines

Courtesy Singapore Airlines

It would be more meaningful to compare Cathay’s performance with its major regional competitors. Singapore Airlines (SIA) reported Q1 (Apr-Jun) profit of S$197 million (US$144 million) (up from S$108 million) while the other carriers in the Group – SilkAir, Scoot and Tigerair – also did better on the back of lower fuel prices. But group revenue declined by 2.1 per cent because of lower contribution by parent airline SIA. In July passenger load was down 1.2 per cent (1.676 million from 1.697 million), and the load factor by 2.2 pts at 82.4 per cent from 84.6 per cent. Except for East Asia (with flat performance), all other regions suffered declining loads.

This may be indicative of the global economic trend. Like Cathay, SIA’s fortune has shifted from the longer haul to the regional routes. Europe suffered the highest decline (4.5 pts) followed by Americas (3.1 pts). The picture will become clearer when it reports Q2 (making up the first half year) results. According to Mr Slosar of Cathay, the business outlook “remains challenging”.

Courtesy APP

Courtesy APP

However, it is good news downunder as Qantas reported record profit of A$1.53 billion (US$1.15 billion) for the year ending June 2016, up 57 per cent – the best result in its 95-year history. Qantas Domestic, Qantas International and the Jetstar Group all reported record results: the domestic market chalked up a record A$820 million, up A$191 million, and the international division A$722 million, up A$374 million. The Qantas Transformation program seemed to have continued working its magic to “reshape the Group’s base and ability to generate revenue” according to its report. CEO Alan Joyce said: “Transformation has made us a more agile business.” And, unlike Cathay, effective fuel hedging saw the Group secure an A$664 million benefit from lower global fuel prices, leaving us to wonder what Cathay would say to that.

It is once again a feather in Mr Joyce’s cap. He added: “The Qantas Group expects to continue its strong financial performance in the first half of financial year 2017, in a more competitive revenue environment. We are focused on preserving high operating margins through the delivery of the Qantas Transformation program, careful capacity management, and the benefit of low fuel prices locked in through our hedging.” He believed the long-term outlook for the Group to be positive.

The contrasting fortunes of airlines may prompt one to ask how in the end that as much attribution of an airline’s performance is attributed to global influences, so too as much is balanced by its self-discipline in adjusting to the vicissitudes of the times, its astuteness in seizing shifting opportunities and, of course, its ability to read global and regional trends as unpredictable as they are.

Soekarno-Hatta International Airport ready to take on regional competition

Photograph by Gunawan Kartapranato, courtesy Wikimedia Commons

Photograph by Gunawan Kartapranato, courtesy Wikimedia Commons

Last week a new 5-trillion rupiah (US$382 million) terminal opened at Indonesia’s Soekarno-Hatta International Airport – also known as Cengkareng Airport (CGK) – in Jakarta, capable of handling about 25 million passengers a year when fully operational by March next year.

The airport is already handling more than 60 million passengers annually, almost three times the 22 million originally planned for. The capacity was subsequently expanded to 38 million. With a large domestic market, CGK ranked as the world’s 17th busiest airport.

Indonesian officials said CGK would be able to rival the neighbouring airports of Changi (Singapore) and Kuala Lumpur International (KLIA) (Malaysia) in attracting international passengers to transit at Jakarta. Rivalry in the region is to be expected. Changi has long been the indisputable airport of choice for transit and transfer traffic, and CGK is increasingly looking at retaining traffic out of Indonesia for the long haul direct from its base. Why, for example, should an Indonesian travel to London via Changi and not direct from CGK?

Changi has the edge in cutting edge technology, a reputation for efficiency and excellent customer service, and a wide spectrum of connectivity. Whereas in the past, its closest rivals in the region used to be KLIA and Bangkok’s Suvernabhumi (Don Muang before that), the challenge today comes from farther afield in Hong Kong International (HKIA) and Dubai International. It tells one things: the home-based carrier plays an important role in enhancing the advantage of the airport – Singapore Airlines in the case of Changi, Cathay in the case of HKIA and Emirates, Dubai International. So CGK may get a boost from Indonesian flag carrier Garuda as it continues to renew and grow.

Changi for one does not rest on its laurels as it continually upgrades and expands its facilities. But make no bones about CGK’s ambition. To put it more modestly, Ituk Herarindri, director of facilities of Angkasa Pura 2 which operates CGK, said: “We are planning it to be a hub like Singapore and Kuala Lumpur.”

United Airlines steals a march on Singapore Airlines

Courtesy Alamy

Courtesy Alamy

United Airlines has stolen a march on Singapore Airlines (SIA) when it announced its launch of a non-stop service between San Francisco and Singapore in June. This will be the first non-stop service between Singapore and the United States after SIA terminated its services to Los Angeles and New York in 2013. United`s announcement came soon after SIA made known its plans to resume non-stop services in 2018, if not earlier in 2017.

You may wonder why United has moved so quickly to fill the void left by SIA when the poor loads experienced by the latter contributed to its suspension of the non-stop services. Apparently the passenger traffic between the two markets has since improved and is growing by an average of 4 per cent annually. Of course, this is good news for Singapore Changi Airport, which is hoping that United could potentially bring more tourists to Singapore. Understandably, it does not matter which airline brings in the load. And since it is believed that capacity will help grow the traffic, then United has made the right move while SIA waits. The business climate changes so fast that the right time is as good as anybody`s guess.

For SIA, it is an opportunity cost. Or, an opportunity lost. When it terminated its non-stop services to New York, regional rival Cathay Pacific moved in quickly to fill up the void, flying non-stop between Hong Kong and New York. That also pits Hong Kong International Airport, which is only some four hours away from Changi, as an Asian gateway for onward connections. It also provides opportunities for Middle Eastern airlines, notably Emirates, Qatar Airways and Etihad Airways, to better compete to carry more traffic through their Gulf hubs as they expand their connections within Asia and services direct to the US.

Changi`s euphoria over United`s decision is understandable, since connections are key to hub operations. With a non-stop link between Singapore and San Francisco, it will mean more regional traffic feeding into Changi to take advantage of the trans-Pacific connection and the support of United`s extensive network within the US. United vice-president of Atlantic and Pacific sales Marcel Fuchs said: “Those arriving in San Francisco will have dozens of options to connect to other cities across the Americas.” Changi Airport Group senior vice-president for market development Lim Ching Kiat echoed the same sentiment, adding that it will strengthen Changi’s position as the preferred gateway between South=east Asia and North America.

United’s domestic network may be its edge over SIA when the time comes for the latter to mount its planned non-stop services. But SIA can always rely on its partnership links with US carriers such as JetBlue, not excluding too United which is a Star Alliance partner. And SIA has always competed on the strength of its superior service. For the long haul, especially for one that flies such a great distance, it is an important customer consideration.

United’s non-stop flight from San Francisco to Singapore is an estimated 16-hour-20-minute journey. Singapore’s erstwhile non-stop flight in the same direction but from Los Angeles to Singapore clocked 17 hours 30 minutes, and from New York (Newark) non-stop to Singapore, 18 hours or longer. United will be flying the B787 Dreamliner for the new non-stop route. In the past, SIA was operating the Airbus A349-500 but will be converting seven of 63 A350-900s on order to the A350-900ULR variant for the resumed services – the reason for the delayed plan. Referring to the new variant aircraft at the time of its announcement to resume the services, SIA chief executive Goh Choon Phong said: “We are pleased that Airbus was able to offer the right aircraft to do so in a commercially viable manner.”

Perhaps too, little did SIA suspect that United would spring ahead to operate its service using the Dreamliner. According to travel magazine Conde Nast, the Boeing 787 could possibly be the most comfortable aircraft by far to travel the ultra-long distance of 8,446 miles, said to be designed to limit jet lag. Among the reasons cited: the 787 has a better air filtration system and more humidity than comparable planes, so you’re less likely to land with chapped lips or dried skin and nasal passages; the windows are larger so the cabin looks brighter and roomier; and the ride is promised to be smoother and quieter. United vice-president Ron Baur said: “Our passengers will arrive less fatigued, and most experience a significant reduction in jet lag,”

We will have to wait to see what SIA has up its sleeves. There may be surprises yet. SIA’s previous services were configured as an all-business-class flight, and while the target market is still very much corporate and business travellers, SIA is not revealing details about how many seats the new business class cabin will have. However, weight limitations are likely to suggest more leg room, if not fewer seats.

High fuel costs were a major reason why SIA suspended its previous non-stop operations. Fortunately for United, today`s low oil price favours its early move and affords the American carrier precious lead time to consolidate its market. Until SIA resumes its non-stop operations, the game belongs to United.

This article was first published in Aspire Aviation titled “United Airlines vs Singapore Airlines: The race for non-stop US-Singapore connections”.

World’s best airports: What do travellers really want?

Zurich Airport. Photo courtesy Alamy.

Zurich Airport. Photo courtesy Alamy.

Conde Nast’s latest list of the world’s best airports by its readers throws up familiar names: 1. Changi Airport (Singapore) 2. Dubai International 3. Hong Kong International 4. Ben Gurion Airport (Tel Aviv) 5. Seoul Incheon (Korea) 6. Tokyo-Haneda (Japan) 7. Hamad International (Doha) 8. Abu Dhabi International 9. Zurich International 10. Vancouver International.

Two key factors emerge as top considerations in the voting: easy access and VIP lounges.

Changi, Ben Gurion, Haneda and Vancouver top for easy access. Changi is supported by an army of taxis and the subway train. Vancouver is also directly linked by the subway to the city centre. Ben Gurion is only 9 miles from downtown Tel Aviv. Compared to Narita, Haneda is much nearer to the city.

The other six airports in the list top for VIP lounges – notably First Class and Business Class of the home airlines. All three Gulf airports stand out for their lounges. Emirates boasts direct boarding from the lounges. Besides Qatar Airways’ lavish lounges for premium passengers at Hamad, there are Quiet Rooms for all classes of travellers. So too at Abu Dhabi, besides Etihad Airways’ exclusive lounges, there are 24 Finnish-designed GoSleep pods.

What does the survey tell us about what air travellers really want of an airport?

It really depends on whether you are an arriving/departing passenger or a transit or connecting passenger with time to spare between flights.

Easy access is critical if you have to head to town or from town.

Comfort is important if you have to spend time waiting inside the sterile area. The Conde Nast report may however be too niche on the second aspect in its skewed assessment of VIP lounges which are only available to premium passengers. Most home airlines impress with lavish facilities for this class of customers. The majority of the travellers will have to make do with the common space – not only for resting but also for F&B, retail outlets and other services that airports such as Changi and Hong Kong thrive on. It is the halo effect of marketing prestige.

Conde Nast’s latest list of the world’s best airports by its readers throws up familiar names: 1. Changi Airport (Singapore) 2. Dubai International 3. Hong Kong International 4. Ben Gurion Airport (Tel Aviv) 5. Seoul Incheon (Korea) 6. Tokyo-Haneda (Japan) 7. Hamad International (Doha) 8. Abu Dhabi International 9. Zurich International 10. Vancouver International.

Two key factors emerge as top considerations in the voting: easy access and VIP lounges.

Changi, Ben Gurion, Haneda and Vancouver top for easy access. Changi is supported by an army of taxis and the subway train. Vancouver is also directly linked by the subway to the city centre. Ben Gurion is only 9 miles from downtown Tel Aviv. Compared to Narita, Haneda is much nearer to the city.

The other six airports in the list top for VIP lounges – notably First Class and Business Class of the home airlines. All three Gulf airports stand out for their lounges. Emirates boasts direct boarding from the lounges. Besides Qatar Airways’ lavish lounges for premium passengers at Hamad, there are Quiet Rooms for all classes of travellers. So too at Abu Dhabi, besides Etihad Airways’ exclusive lounges, there are 24 Finnish-designed GoSleep pods.

What does the survey tell us about what air travellers really want of an airport?

It really depends on whether you are an arriving/departing passenger or a transit or connecting passenger with time to spare between flights.

Easy access is critical if you have to head to town or from town.

Comfort is important if you have to spend time waiting inside the sterile area. The Conde Nast report may however be too niche on the second aspect in its skewed assessment of VIP lounges which are only available to premium passengers. Most home airlines impress with lavish facilities for this class of customers. The majority of the travellers will have to make do with the common space – not only for resting but also for F&B, retail outlets and other services that airports such as Changi and Hong Kong thrive on. It is the halo effect of marketing prestige.

The real battle behind Jetstar HK’s rejection

Courtesy Jetstar

Courtesy Jetstar

IT might well have been a technical inquiry. Jetstar Hong Kong (JHK)’s fate was hanging in the balance as the court debated the definition of “principal place of business” (PPB) which Cathay Pacific Airways and other airlines in the opposing camp so successfully narrowed down to as the sole criterion to decide Jetstar’s legitimacy. They contend that “the task before ATLA (Air Transport Licensing Authority) is the determination of whether JHK meets the PPB requirement now, and not whether 25 other airlines met that requirement at any point in the past.”

The objectors submitted that JHK does not have its principal place of business in Hong Kong, so granting it a licence to operate scheduled air services contravenes Article 134 of the Basic Law. If they had attempted to set the direction of the proceedings, they had succeeded, stating that “the common law meaning of PPB, i.e. that the PPB of an entity where the effective exercise of central and ultimate management control of the entity lies, is thus the intended meaning as it best suits the intended purpose of ensuring that only Hong Kong-based airline may be licensed by the HKSAR (Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region) authorities.”

It has been two years since JHK set up its intended base in Hong Kong, initially as a joint venture between Qantas and China Eastern Airlines. Cathay and other home-based airlines – Dragonair, Hong Kong Airlines and Hong Kong Express Airways – were quick to protest, and as it became clear that the PPB clause would be the hot issue of contention, local conglomerate Shun Tak Holdings came on board as the majority shareholder (51%), and its managing director Pansy Ho was named the new company’s chairman. The onus then rested on JHK’s shoulders to demonstrate how that composition, the control and decision making machinery as structured by it, would make the airline a Hong Kong company. JHK contends that it “has entered an arrangement with Jetstar Airways Pty Limited (JAPL) as licensor of the ‘Jetstar’ brand and as a service provider.”

In the end, ATLA decided that was not good enough. It said: “In determining whether the principal place of business of an applicant is in Hong Kong, the answer is not confined to where the day-to-day operations are conducted (but) its activities must not be subject to the control of senior management, shareholders or related parties located elsewhere.” It concluded: “The Panel is of the view that JHK cannot make its decisions independently from that of the two foreign shareholders. The Panel does not have to decide whether its nerve centre or whether its principal place of business is in Australia or the mainland China. The Panel needs only to determine whether JHK has its PPB in Hong Kong. We are of the view that it is not and therefore the PPB requirement is not satisfied.”

Naturally both Qantas CEO Alan Joyce and JHK CEO Edward Lau expressed disappointment at the outcome, but one wonders if they were at all surprised even though they had previously expressed confidence that ATLA would eventually approve JHK’s application. The thing is that technically the state of play is not theirs to win, for as much as Mr Lau insisting that “we genuinely believed that Hong Kong is Jetstar Hong Kong’s principal place of business.” JHK as a branch of the main Jetstar entity and Qantas’s vehicle to extend its market reach is more than just implied in the brand’s genesis, which the objectors made capital of, pointing out that “JHK is related to Qantas via Jetstar International Group Holdings Co. Lrd and through Qantas to JAPL.” They contend that it is all part of a Jetstar Pan-Asia Strategy “to create an integrated Jetstar network in which each Jetstar LCC will, far from operating independently, share aircraft, boarding, airport facilities and a further range of unspecified goods and services.” JHK’s rebuttal that JAPL, in spite of the relationship, is but an outsource partner was not convincing.

To some degree, JHK might have felt straitjacketed by the narrow scope for arguing its case. Mr Joyce said ATLA’s ruling was as disappointing for JHK shareholders as it was for travellers: “At a time when aviation markets across Asia are opening up, Hong Kong is going in the opposite direction. Given the importance of aviation to global commerce, shutting the door to new competition can only serve the vested interests already installed in that market.” That is an issue that the Hong Kong government may have to address separately, as a matter of policy unprejudiced by JHK’s application.

As a key aviation hub in the region, Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA) can only benefit from an open policy and more competition.  Throughout the proceedings were timely reminders of the importance of maintaining “the status of Hong Kong as a centre of international and regional aviation.”

However, Qantas had misread the apparent liberalised aviation landscape in Hong Kong, assuming it to be as open as, say, Singapore. When it once considered setting up an Asia-based premium carrier, Hong Kong was an attractive alternative because of the growing traffic from the China hinterland. Qantas had also failed to anticipate the strong opposition from OneWorld partner Cathay and compatriots, considering the relative ease that it had experienced in setting up the Jetstar brand in other locations such as Singapore, Vietnam and Japan. At some point, the advance is apt to draw awareness of the competition it poses.

Across the globe, entering into a joint venture with a local partner provides a convenient channel for a foreign carrier to gain a foothold in the local market, perhaps made easier if the partner were an airline, better still, the national flag carrier. In that connection, Shun Tak might have been viewed by the objectors as a potential local threat to come into its own riding on the back of more experienced operators.

Qantas might also have placed too much weight on the facilitation expected of a name like China Eastern. That became apparent when the court pointed out that “the Central People’s Government (of China) shall give the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region the authority to issue licences to airlines incorporated in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and having their principal place of business in Hong Kong.” It may even be suggested that the relative silence of both Shun Tak and China Eastern in the tussle could only project their passive roles but Qantas’s prime-mover position.

The technicality of Article 134 of the Basic Law as a moot point aside, it cannot be denied that  implicit in the objectors’ presentation is their concern of the competition posed by JHK. They contend that the joint venture aims “to deepen the Qantas Group presence in Asia-Pacific.” Refuting JHK’s claim of “the economic benefits which can be brought by the new airline and its contribution to maintaining Hong Kong as an international aviation hub,” the objectors insist that the Jetstar business model is designed “in the wider interests of all the Jetstar LCCs rather than JHK alone” and that all decisions pertaining to JHK’s operations such as capacity and aircraft purchases “are made with a view to maximising profitability for the Qantas Group.” They argued that through the Jetstar Pan-Asia Strategy, “Qantas is increasing the international competitiveness of a key Australian business by seeking to capitalise on the growth in demand for air travel services in Asia for its own benefit and ultimately the benefit of Australians.”

Indeed, Cathay’s early objection had hinged on the economic aspects of JHK’s proposition, which might have given JHK firmer ground to promote its application. Cathay insisted that unlike other Asian countries, the nature of the Hong Kong market is such that it has no real need of LCCs – that, in spite of the operations of Hong Kong Express and calls made by foreign budget carriers. Why would Cathay, already one of the world’s most successful and profitable carriers, be so threatened by JHK? It is apparent that the rivalry is more specific than general, the wariness of an expanding Jetstar network that is supporting an international competitor.

All’s fair in war as in love even as some observers hint at Cathay’s political sway. What next then for JHK? As at December last year, Qantas has invested some A$10 million (US$7.7 million) in the joint venture. JHK has already sold eight of its nine aircraft. Rather than accept ATLA’s decision as a natural demise of the unborn carrier, Mr Joyce has not ruled out appealing the decision. Consulting experts may already be working at more creative solutions to skirt round the technicality of the Basic Law. Or, as Qantas too had hinted, it might reconsider basing the low-cost carrier in Hong Kong, perhaps elsewhere but close enough where the real market screams loud to be served. No doubt a costly affair, it all depends on how much farther the shareholders are prepared to go.

And as the objectors hailed ATLA’s ruling as “the right decision for Hong Kong” with Cathay corporate affairs director James Tong reiterating that it “ensures that important Hong Kong economic assets, its air traffic rights, are used for the benefit of the people and the economy of Hong Kong,” proponents of more liberal aviation competition may begin to wonder to whom the real victory belongs.

This article was first published in Aspire Aviation.