Jump to content

TG cut back on US flights


Barry

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 29
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The US market is tough for TG due to a smaller ratio of business traffic between the countries, as opposed to others. Daily nonstops would theoretically capture that market, but there just isn't enough of it. The article said they had something like 80% load factor on the New York flight and still couldn't cut it. By contrast, Singapore is doing well with their nonstops and everyone wants to sit in business class, not premium economy.

 

Leisure fares between the US-TH are really competitive too, and TG always got f*cked on the US routes with stops in Japan because they had to dump their fares so low on the US-Japan legs, due to lack of frequency and customer loyalty. The flag carriers from North America and intermediate countries (Japan, Korea, Taiwan, HK) actually charge higher fares between their two countries than they do for the longer trip to/from Thailand, but Thai doesn't have that luxury. Maybe they make money on the origin Japan to Thailand passengers, but that's only one out of four.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your paying a premium for the BKK-LAX because it's the only airline flying direct. Those flights have always been higher. With rising fuel prices it's not that outrageous.

You have no choice. That's the only route TG offers to the US. The price is higher because of marketing (trying to sell me a product I really don't care much about).

 

And, let's see here...are you contending that a plane that flies further and makes a stop uses less fuel to go that distance than one that flies shorter and non-stop? Don't think so, mate. Fuel has nothing to do with it in this case.

 

It is outrageous when you can fly one of a dozen other carriers and get it for ~US$1300 (KE, CX, JL, OZ, CA, UA to name a few) -- ya, it is with a stop, but I do not really care. And the SQ example I gave *was* for their non-stop SIN-LAX, so it IS apples to apples. And no argument from anyone that SQ is far superior in service to TG.

 

Hence, TG is priced out of the market for this consumer, who is very loyal to TG, but enough is enough.

 

Cheers,

SD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I was saying before (probably not too well), fares have long been depressed in the US-TH market and the type of traveler that Thai generally gets is willing to make a stop to save a few bucks.

 

On the other hand, the comparison to SQ is definitely apples to apples, except for the O or D. But I guess if you were to ask me which route would be more profitable, I would have picked Thailand for its polulation and geographic position over the tiny city state of Singapore. Apart from what I said earlier about more business travel on the Singapore route, I guess that's where you have to give credit to SQ's marketing. People here want to fly them before they even know where they want to go.

 

So, if anyone could operate the US-Thailand route successfully, I guess SQ could. F*ck, they're already practically Indonesia's flag carrier. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LAX-BKK gets the tourists who fly coach (while in first/biz a lot of upgrades, mileage tickets, thai officials who pay much less etc.).

LAX-SIN gets the business people who fly biz.

biz tickets are 3-4 times the price of coach for less than double space!

so no need to do a lot of maths to see why SQ can operate with higher profitability than TG on the route to LAX!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, Samak!

 

For saying what I was trying to say and just got ridiculed on another board for not being able to say it or spell correctly on this board. :confused:

 

The asshole friend of mine who criticized me was probably correct, though. I was thinking illogically, like an airline person. :crazy:

 

PS. You are soooo right about the quality of passengers in the forward compartments, govt. officials, upgrades and the like!!! It helps to have folks up there who are actually paying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that they've priced themselves out of the market. My latest look at prices BKK-LAX-BKK was B58k (US$1825!) for plain econ and B66k for delux econ. That's a lot of money. Heck' date=' even Sillypore was cheaper at B59k for their non-stop SIN-LAX.

 

Typical Thais. They have no customers, so they raise prices to drive away the remaining few. :banghead:

 

Cheers,

SD[/quote']

 

SD, very true, I used to be a very regular flyer with TG mainly on the LHR/BKK route with a gold Royal Orchid card. But I hav'nt flown with them for about 3 years. They want premium prices but don't offer a premium service. A friend flew with them a few weeks ago and no change for the better. Worn out seats, still no in seat entertainment and water dripping down from the ceiling. They also have less favourable conditions for the Royal Orchid programme now than in the past.

Simie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SD, very true, I used to be a very regular flyer with TG mainly on the LHR/BKK route with a gold Royal Orchid card. But I hav'nt flown with them for about 3 years. They want premium prices but don't offer a premium service. A friend flew with them a few weeks ago and no change for the better. Worn out seats, still no in seat entertainment and water dripping down from the ceiling. They also have less favourable conditions for the Royal Orchid programme now than in the past.

Simie.

 

Was the dripping water on take off from BKK? If so, it's normal in the tropics... If it kept happening through the flight, I'd be nervous though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...