Should Qantas "share" its hub?

These flights are subject to interlining agreements that Qantas has with those carriers on those flights.

The difference being that Qantas doesn't market fares on these flights even though they can sell fares that include these flights. Generally speaking fares which include an interline flight aren't the cheaper fares (and therefore Qantas wouldn't be proactively marketing themselves as an option between Asia and South America, beyond their own destination ports and codeshare destinations).

I don't completely agree that QF doesn't market fares to those destinations as I have seen them market EZE, GRU etc even though they don't fly there - own metal or codeshare.

I understand that oneworld carriers have access to each others fares at an 'alliance rate', which is more competitive than an interline. Having said that, if a codeshare would improve price and marketing, then they should be doing it to key destinations.  

If Qantas did this, then in the near future we would be seeing on AusBT that "Qantas is only good for Jakarta if you live in ADL". Qantas will never make money serving smaller cities like ADL internationally... SQ, CX can because they fly passengers from ADL to their respective hubs and then onwards through their networks. QF would have to fill up a plane to SIN with predominately SIN bound passengers (with a few limited connections). As for CGK, given the population centres, wouldn't you fly the route between the two largest cities?

As for Perth, I'll personally don't know how QF can't make it work out there in some form.

If you compare Australia with the USA (both geographically large countries with the US having a much larger population base), the legacy carriers over there, basically only fly to true international destinations from their hub airports.

Yeah good point hutch, SQ can fly to ADL and CHC because their passengers arent nessessarily going to SIN but they're going to Europe, Middle East, North Asia etc. Something that Qantas can't compete with since Australia is the cul-de-sac of the world.

No person living outside NSW and to a lesser extent VIC wants to travel via Syd to most anywhere QF int flys,part of the reason so few Australians travel on Qantas internationally..They have totally neglected every QF int port outside SYD to fly from and to various int destinations.As other airlines make money flying non stop.Huch you do not need to fly from a so called hub to make money,you just need to be committed to develop a load factor which all be it a QF is verry high because of there costs.

AS to hub a far better solution to Qf woes would be funnel all Perth/Adelaide Based pax  traveling to the US-Thu Brisbane,UP grade the 744 to A380 fly it nonstop to LAX or may be SFO.Much less fuel,up to an hour less flight time across the pacific,and with proper schedualing,great connections,overall less total flight time and no SYDNEY airport connections.

Right...so Qantas's drop in international market share has come about due to it centralising operations? It's got nothing to do with a greater number of options available to the travelling public.

You argument against hub flying negates the realities of global aviation. Airlines, particulary those with higher cost bases, are centralising their operations. The other airlines that "make money flying non stop" are flying to their hubs - with the exceptions being those fifth freedom routes served by EK and to a lesser extent EY.

In relation to BNE, have you noticed that every carrier that flies LAX to Australia flies to SYDNEY daily. You would assume the four airlines know where the market is?

And no, I am not sydney based.

Hey Rob. Great points on committing to the routes and load factors, also sending people to BNE could work even if it just gives people a change or balance the numbers on board LAX services. I dont mind going via SYD sometimes as it gives me an extra 40 SC's and from BNE we are a bit spoilt that I can make the "domestic connection" to SYD on QF 8, seat 3F of course. ;-)

May i also add no curfews at BNE and may be just may be  save some millions in aircraft parking fees at LAX by turning those aircraft arround and in SYD,s case arriving before the evening shutdown.

There are plenty of good economic reasons for Qantas's hub to remain in Sydney and two poor ones; 1) overnight restrictions, and 2) poor capacity.

The culture and psyche of management is focused on Sydney. Call it an accident of history, but the fact remains that Qantas is Sydney-centric. Nothing will change unless that changes.

Agree that those two points as well as the hopeless Dom-Int transfer are big negatives.

I believe Jetstar had looked more than Qantas at a Darwin hub (would be perfect for A320 flights to Asia) but ran into difficulties as to who would pay for terminal expansions.

-- Which is another government-made problem that QF and JQ face, in SIN, KUL, DXB etc the government just funds the airport development and benefits from extras like tourism and GDP growth -- much harder when you've sold your airport to a profit making entity

Too late dude. if you don't live in SYD there are plenty of OW partners (or otherwise) to get you abroad. QF fire-hosed all the non-SYD passengers to EK or let them discover other airlines. 

Your right Tronix and just look at how screwed up they are now,and as a p1 who is not based in SYD we all have a right to be pissed.

Absolutely. 

Be good if Qantas could partner with a Singapore and/or Cathay, but not going to happen for forseeable future.  Singapore Airlines very publicly rejected Qantas advances a while ago. Qantas ended up partnering with Emirates instead. Jetstar Asia was born of necessity. The competition is good for our market and Qantas will find a way back into the game.