Marlborough airline Sounds Air could pick up the slack after the national carrier announced it was ending flights between Blenheim and Christchurch. Air New Zealand announced on Monday it was pulling out of its Blenheim-Christchurch and Auckland-Whanganui routes because of a lack of demand. Sounds Air managing director Andrew Crawford said the privately-owned airline was exploring taking up the Blenheim-Christchurch route, which he said would operate at least twice daily. The airline, which had a fleet of Cessna Caravans and Pilatus PC12s, had taken over other regional routes abandoned by Air New Zealand, including those between Westport and Taupo to Wellington. Marlborough Mayor Alistair Sowman said he was disappointed and frustrated by the national carrier's decision. "Now that Air New Zealand has left this vacuum I would anticipate our successful local operator Sounds Air might see the opportunity here so let's wait and see what happens," he said. An Air New Zealand spokesperson said when the direct service ended on July 31, the quickest flight time via Wellington would be 90 minutes and the cheapest fare would remain the same at $59. The reason the airline pulled the routes was because of a lack of demand, however it had been criticised for not waiting longer to see if demand would pick up on its larger planes. The Blenheim-Christchurch route had been serviced by Beechcraft 1900D aircraft, however these were replaced by 50-seater Bombardier Q300s in early May. Marlborough Airport chief executive Dean Heiford said he was disappointed the carrier had made the announcement so soon after switching to the larger planes. "I'm disappointed they didn't give us a bit more of a chance to build capacity, but I understand it's an economic decision," he said. The spokeswoman said the 50-seat services had been available to book for more than a year and the airline had dropped lead-in fare prices by 40 per cent to reflect the increased capacity. But there had only been an increase of around two to three people per day, she said. "Forward bookings on this route are not strong enough to sustain a viable service." Staff at PC Media, in Blenheim, used the service at least once a week for business. Technical director Lee Harper said the airline had not waited long enough to see if demand would pick up. "It was three weeks in the middle of winter with barely any promotion," he said. The times for business people travelling from Blenheim were good, but hardly anyone used the 6.10am departure time from Christchurch, he said. It would be too difficult to get from Blenheim to Christchurch via Wellington by 9am, so Harper said staff would have to drive and stay overnight in the city. Marlborough Tour Company managing director Chris Godsiff said the flight schedule had contributed to the lack of demand which caused the service to close. "The flights that Air New Zealand put on weren't particularly user-friendly, they were pretty cranky times," he said. International visitors coming to Blenheim might be put off by having to get two flights, he said. "It's got to be a deterrent, because the last thing you want to do when you get to New Zealand is get another two flights, one is bad enough." Sowman said the timing of the announcement was frustrating because the top of the South was expecting more Chinese visitors. Destination Marlborough general manager Tracy Johnston said the news was disappointing but around 80 per cent of international visitors arrived in New Zealand through Auckland Airport. Blenheim had good connectivity with Auckland, so she did not think cutting the Blenheim-Christchurch link would impact the number of overseas tourists coming to Marlborough.
Go on Andrew... you guys can make it work. PC-12 is the machine with a realistic timetable and your fair fares!
I don't understand why the media use the example of a company who uses it once a week and tries to make it sound like their business is going to fail because they can't get to CHC before 9am yet they show no support for possible 3rd level operations. That's why the regional market is failing for Air NZ - the customers are too picky.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand why you call it the national carrier, when Air New Zealand is just one of the airlines operating in this country. Yes, the government backs it somewhat, but it's attitudes like this that make the smaller guys fail continuously because everyone thinks that 'Air New Zealand are doing the right thing'.
ReplyDelete'Customers are too picky' - Really??? For example, West Coast business people wanting to do a day trip in Wellington have to wait till 9.45am to leave Hokitika and get to Wellington at noon. To catch the last flight back they have to leave at 2.00pm giving them a whole two hours in Wellington. Is that being picky??? Your sort of attitude is what Air NZ used to be like in Friendship days... the attitude is we will offer you a service at a time that suits us. The buying out of Eagle and Air Nelson introduced frequency and that opened up and grew regional air services. Gradually the management of regional ops has been assumed back to head office. With a new CEO who is not interested in regional NZ ops there are more chops ahead.
ReplyDeleteAir NZ is the largest domestic short and medium haul airline that operates to more destinations in NZ than Jetstar, so in essence, it is a 'national' carrier.
ReplyDeleteWhen Jetstar operates as many domestic short and medium haul routes as Air NZ, then Jetstar can be also called a 'national' carrier.
Air NZ of the past is not the Air NZ of the present. With fine tuning is regional routes, Air NZ saying to 2nd/3rd level operators, go for it and build you own local route networks or work together to build a 2nd level national regional network.
Since this a new playing field for 2nd/3rd level carriers, they have to work out what is best for their bottom line, so schedules have to work for the carrier and may not suit the consumer, who has been use to having schedules to suit their travel needs through Air NZ. In essence its going to be a learning curve for both the air operator and the consumer and local communities.
Unfortunately, there will be casualties on the way amongst the 2nd/3rd level carriers.
Once 2nd/3rd level operators can build a cohesive regional 2nd level route network from Kaitaia to Oban in Stewart Island in association with local communities and have the ability to co-share or sell seats between themselves like KRA and Barrier Air are trying to do and have interlining with Air NZ and/or Qantas/Jetstar, then small regional businesses will have schedules to suit their businesses requirements and leisure consumers can see friends/families and tourists will come and visit local tourist attractions.
Codesharing will never work amongst 3rd level carriers, fares are lean and there isn't the appetite.
ReplyDeleteWhat about 2nd carriers like KRA, Barrier Air, Air Chatmans?
DeleteIsn't KRA and Barriers trying to sell each seats. To me that is form of co-sharing as oppose to a full co-share like with NZ/VA.
Two points here, the early start same day business return flights and the tourism flights are not the same thing. Optimising the timetable for one excludes a proportion of the other. With limited asset availability an airline must make a choice as to which provides the greater return. Imagine on holiday and having to get up at O dark hundred to make a internal flight! NZ is a little unusual in its early starts as many countries don't open shop until 1000.
ReplyDeleteCode sharing is not as simple as just placing their name on the ticket. There are commerce commission approvals as competitors they have to have approval to talk to each other if they are both in the same market. If one is an IATA carrier then there are certain standards that are required to be meet before they can code share including its IATA audit status. The IATA audit is way more expensive and involved than a CAA audit. After the fallout of Queen Air accident, companies are very cautious about aligning with just anyone.
I know how full co-sharing works.
DeleteAt present regional 2nd/3rd operators are all trying to do their own thing in a new market environment, in developing there businesses and with a small population, there are going to be casualties amongst these operators resulting some communities may not have any air services at all.
With a new market environment created by Air NZ streamlining its regional services, this allows 2nd/3rd level operators to operate to destinations, that Air NZ no longer flies too.
By have a 2nd level regional carrier network (Air NZ/Jetstar is 1st level) it gives 2and/3rd carriers to operate their own routes using one reservation system to enable them to sell each other seats and marketing plus better equipment utilization for local communities catering for leisure, business and tourism.
KRA and Barrier Air is trying to do this but the general NZ public is not aware of this due to lack of marketing.
So, if they can do it, so why can Soundsair, Air Chatmans, etc do it. It makes economic sense to do it.
"Co-sharing"? "Air Chatmans"? Struggler.
DeleteThe number of passengers who would actualy use a code share would be so small it wouldnt be any use unless if it was with air nz or jet star flying say whakatane to auckland then auckland to wellington christchurch or international but air nz or jetstar are unlikely to do this, i cant see many passengers flying the likes of nelson hamilton then on to auckland because they could just fly direct for cheaper with air nz or jetstar or say air chats operated whakatane wellington i cant see many mayby 1 every so many flights actualy wanting to carry onto nelson/blenheim/picton ect with sounds air
DeleteCo operation by joining two sectors with two different operators as per KRA and BA, is not code sharing, it is just co operation.
ReplyDelete