Airlines in the Philippines

[seven13]

Arianespace wrote

seven13 wrote

BTW, 2P cabin crew are undergoing business class training. I wonder what new set up will be introduced.

I think this question is answered now.

I expected this decision forthcoming since 2013. It took CAB 1 year to decide and another codeshare made. The decision is right. Actually PAL was caught red handed on this one when it should have flown last year. Instead it flew GAP. The situation now is either PAL will fly DXB or lose the 7 slots.

I still remember how we used to discuss this whole DXB on the other site. It really got me confusing. Let me get this straight. PR has its entitlements of 14 while GAP has 7. CEB got the remaining 7. With the cancellation of EK from 3 to 2 flights, PR should utilize it right or else lose the 7 frequency while the other 7 with PR is used to AUH?

[Eurest]

The UAE ASA's are really confusing because they are split between Dubai and Abu Dhabi

For the 2009 ASA, there were only 14 frequencies to DXB and 14 frequencies to AUH to MNL
EK has 7 to DXB
PR has 7 to DXB, but EK basically uses this entitlement thus EK had 2 flights
EY has 7 to AUH
PR has 7 to AUH, but EY basically uses this entitlement thus EY had 2 flights

For the 2012 ASA, there are now 56 frequencies to the UAE
EK use 21 frequencies to operate 19 flights DXB-MNL borrowing PR's 7
EY use 14 frequencies to operate 14 flights AUH-MNL
PR use 14 frequencies, currently operating 5 flights to AUH and 7 (currently 5) to DXB using 2P's AOC
5J use 7 frequencies, currently operating 5 flights a week and going daily 10/26

So the contention is the 3rd EK flight borrowing PR's entitlements, 5J wants to use these for SHJ but PR will instead mount flights with 876* series to preserve the codeshare which requires J to be offered.
I think SQ and CX will be happy that EK will once again go down to 2 daily flights

[seven13]

@Eurest, didnt GAP have their own entitlements of 7 frequencies while PR holds 14 separately? Then 5J has the remaining 7?

With the current set up, EK borrows 7 flight entitlement thus being able to operate the 0845H departure from MNL leaving PR with the remaining 7 which it uses to AUH (presently at 5X). Now CAB wants PR to operate 7 of the original 14 thus EK cancelling one of the 3 frequencies of else it'll lose its flight entitlements. Did I get it right? Will PR still be able to codeshare with the remaining 2 EK DXB  flight?

[Arianespace]

seven13 wrote

I still remember how we used to discuss this whole DXB on the other site. It really got me confusing. Let me get this straight. PR has its entitlements of 14 while GAP has 7. CEB got the remaining 7. With the cancellation of EK from 3 to 2 flights, PR should utilize it right or else lose the 7 frequency while the other 7 with PR is used to AUH?

You got it right. We got a total of 28 slots in our ASA with UAE ex MNL. It used to be 14 only from either country, i.e. 7 DXB and 7 AUH and 14 out of MNL via PAL. Thus, double daily DXB with UAE borrowing PAL flight, and double daily AUH with ETD borrowing PAL entitlements.

The new additional 14 was divided between GAP and CEB for PHI side, while UAE and ETD got additional 7 equally, thus the 2x without code share. In 2013 UAE borrowed the 7 ETD slots when PAL made codeshare arrangement with ETD, thus they were able to fly 3x daily instead of 2x which PAL doesn't like. They sorted this problem eventually which gave rise to the new UAE and ETD code shares together with that of GAP. If you remember MNL-LHR via AUH deal, this was part of it.

CEB was not however happy as PAL is reneging on its commitment to fly. The contention of CEB was that GAP is not PAL even if the plane is owned by PAL, and PAL renege on its promise to use its slot in 2012, so therefore must lose this right for non-usage. Its the same argument tied with JED for rights to fly in KSA, and the same arguments to AUS which it might finally lose if they don't fly there.

With the current entitlements it really doesn't matter where PAL flies the 14 slots, be it DXB, AUH, SHJ, or DWC. Right now they are using just seven of them.

[romantic_guy08]

Arianespace wrote

seven13 wrote

I still remember how we used to discuss this whole DXB on the other site. It really got me confusing. Let me get this straight. PR has its entitlements of 14 while GAP has 7. CEB got the remaining 7. With the cancellation of EK from 3 to 2 flights, PR should utilize it right or else lose the 7 frequency while the other 7 with PR is used to AUH?

You got it right. We got a total of 28 slots in our ASA with UAE ex MNL. It used to be 14 only from either country, i.e. 7 DXB and 7 AUH and 14 out of MNL via PAL. Thus, double daily DXB with UAE borrowing PAL flight, and double daily AUH with ETD borrowing PAL entitlements.

The new additional 14 was divided between GAP and CEB for PHI side, while UAE and ETD got additional 7 equally, thus the 2x without code share. In 2013 UAE borrowed the 7 ETD slots when PAL made codeshare arrangement with ETD, thus they were able to fly 3x daily instead of 2x which PAL doesn't like. They sorted this problem eventually which gave rise to the new UAE and ETD code shares together with that of GAP. If you remember MNL-LHR via AUH deal, this was part of it.

CEB was not however happy as PAL is reneging on its commitment to fly. The contention of CEB was that GAP is not PAL even if the plane is owned by PAL, and PAL renege on its promise to use its slot in 2012, so therefore must lose this right for non-usage. Its the same argument tied with JED for rights to fly in KSA, and the same arguments to AUS which it might finally lose if they don't fly there.

With the current entitlements it really doesn't matter where PAL flies the 14 slots, be it DXB, AUH, SHJ, or DWC. Right now they are using just seven of them.

Correct me if I'm wrong... but I can actually see that this will benefit PR in the long-run... with EK discontinuing the codeshare flight it operates for PR, reducing to 2 daily flights for EK from DXB. And PR now having to operate this flight, passengers on that flight actually just transfers to PR. They can siphon off passengers from EK on that flight that will be discontinued... I hope EK will codeshare on that flight with PR as the operating carrier.

BTW, heard rumors that EK will finally upgauge one of its MNL flight to an A388...

[Eurest]

My apologies, though 2P does have its own AOC my point of view with them is that they are one.
2P getting frequencies was RSA's choice so that the DXB flights would not have to feature with the EK-PR DXB-MNL codeshare. When the UAE bilaterals were divvied up, adding 2P's AOC into the mix helped in PR's cause as 2 is always better than 1, especially since Z2 was also interested.
Much like what happened during the Japan ASA awarding.
But the DXB 2P flight is basically a PR flight as 8780 is wet leased to 2P.
The same reason 5J is keen to keep DG's AOC and PQ keeping Z2 (or is that vice versa?)

I believe the EK codeshare will continue for W14, but I do not know what happens past then.
EK-PR relations are frosty, especially with the EY strategic partnership as well as EK not wanting to codeshare the 3rd flight when EK applied last 11.2012 but relenting when PR filed a complaint to CAB.

The way things are going, the 2012 UAE ASA may need to be amended asap. I believe both sides may want to add frequencies to MNL judging from the loads of 5J, PR and EK on their respective DXB flights.
Things get more interesting seeing that PR is keen to partner with FZ (via Neil Mill's contacts there I presume), while 5J is keen on partnering with G9 as both are keen on expanding to Middle East points too small to service or restricted by bilaterals or their CivAv(re:JED).

[Arianespace]

Actually, both PAL and UAE can still do a code-sharing of their flights but this time with PR metal. What is disallowed is merely UAE using PAL entitlements to fly to MNL.

I would however use the Emirates plane to get to DXB and beyond.

[Arianespace]

Eurest wrote

My apologies, though 2P does have its own AOC my point of view with them is that they are one.

We do have the same discussion in the other forum before about GAP and PAL, this time in Malaysia. CEB has similar complaint about PAL not using theirs and just content with MAS flying for them.

Band aid fix was to fly GAP but because of the complaint PAL eventually flew but only for a short time just to comply regulatory requirements. Good thing there is plenty of seats left.

When the time comes when they will need more seats then PAL may be up in the water again. Latest news is that ASA negotiation with Malaysia is suspended indefinitely. The fire that boils the water is on again.

But the DXB 2P flight is basically a PR flight as 8780 is wet leased to 2P.
The same reason 5J is keen to keep DG's AOC and PQ keeping Z2 (or is that vice versa?)

No. It is a GAP flight code-shared with PAL. Although your argument is also used by PAL to circumvent the rule but this time CAB was not persuaded in that regard.

I believe the EK codeshare will continue for W14, but I do not know what happens past then.
EK-PR relations are frosty, especially with the EY strategic partnership as well as EK not wanting to codeshare the 3rd flight when EK applied last 11.2012 but relenting when PR filed a complaint to CAB.

Naturally because they belong to EY but It was sorted out as explained above. Now EY got both while EK got PR for its 3rd flight.

The way things are going, the 2012 UAE ASA may need to be amended asap. I believe both sides may want to add frequencies to MNL judging from the loads of 5J, PR and EK on their respective DXB flights.
Things get more interesting seeing that PR is keen to partner with FZ (via Neil Mill's contacts there I presume), while 5J is keen on partnering with G9 as both are keen on expanding to Middle East points too small to service or restricted by bilaterals or their CivAv

The Philippine government is not incline in expanding the bi lateral's ex MNL. UAE proposed 200% expansion but PI granted only 100% considering that it is substantially more than the O&D traffic. The same thing happen to DOH where Qatar wanted more but capacity was clearly beyond the O&D traffic there.

Take note the UAE and Qatar bilateral covers other airport in the Philippines too. Plenty of entitlements  there. QTR has used it for a long time now, from CEB to CRK.

The Philippines is actually acting more like Canada on the middle east, but is more liberal by closing doors to MNL but opening the window to the rest of its airports. In effect protecting the survival of its airline.

[Eurest]

The Philippines is actually acting more like Canada on the middle east, but is more liberal by closing doors to MNL but opening the window to the rest of its airports. In effect protecting the survival of its airline.

It's only MNL that is frequency restricted with the UAE-PH ASA's and all other points in the PH are virtually under an open skies with unlimited traffic rights.
CAB director Arcilla has many times in the past explained that limiting MNL frequency is due to NAIA's slot congestion as well as indirectly promoting the other points in the PH to int'l carriers.
As for CAN, the UAE-CAN ASA only allows for 3 frequencies each for EY and EK to YYZ. All other points like YUL and YVR are off-limits, despite the pleadings from the UAE to add frequencies as well as opening the other points.

I don't believe the PH is protectionist, if it were, it would not have anything like EO 29.
Canada does have a Blue Sky policy, but it is highly subjected to when it is in Canada's overall interest to do so.

[Evodesire]

Any news about the buy out? It's somewhat noisy around PAL that the LT group is coming back in. My fear here is that the LT group lacks that certain aggressiveness that the SMC management has.

[Arianespace]

Eurest wrote

CAB director Arcilla has many times in the past explained that limiting MNL frequency is due to NAIA's slot congestion as well as indirectly promoting the other points in the PH to int'l carriers.

It is the easiest escape goat and probably the most convenient excuse in the book. True but not quite.

Had I not known the inner workings of the government I would have believe you easily.

The fact is, and still is the truth, NAIA could never become an unrestricted airport despite having a spanking new mega airport with plenty of available slots to spare. Not one foreign airline or country will have that exception. O&D traffic will still be the name of the game. Well, that is the primordial basis of all ASA negotiations in the first place. Certainly, the most advance country continue to have it, and so does we.

You are correct however to state that PH is not a protectionist country even if NAIA is restricted. That's why I said we are more liberal than Canada.

The policy of the State, quoting EO29 you mentioned is to open major airports in the countryside to foreign carriers except MNL, apparently to decongest Manila.

The problem of the proposition however is that those open airports leave a lot to be desired almost 25 years after they were open.

Except for Clark, Cebu and lately Kalibo, not much has been happening to the rest of the international airports two decades hence.

Even AirAsia with its gung-ho attitude surrenders in Clark despite boasting "we can do it!". Qatar gives up Cebu when they could have enjoyed monopoly to the gulf, and the latest casualty, Firefly surrenders in Puerto Princesa and abandons plan to launch flight to Davao and Zamboanga due to poor sales. Even Qantas or its LCC subsidiary Jetstar which has rights to fly Davao-Darwin, or Cebu-Darwin doesn't even bother to try the route. Northwest and now Delta Airlines has rights to fly Narita-Cebu yet never made a single journey to the island south of Manila. Those are existing flight entitlements that remained dormant to this day.

That is because airlines wanting to fly to the Philippines desires to fly one and only one place, Manila.  And the government knows exactly the reason why.

[Arianespace]

AirAsia slashes flights amid turbulence from PAL, Cebu Pacific

AirAsiaZest has cut back more flights this month as the budget carrier controlled by Malaysian aviation trailblazer Tony Fernandes encountered more competitive turbulence from Philippine Airlines and Cebu Pacific.

The biggest reduction was made on the busy Manila-Cebu route, with AirAsiaZest reducing the seven daily flights to three, according to the airline's website.

The daily Manila-Tagbilaran flights were also trimmed from four to three.

The reductions were also implemented on key regional routes, despite the budget carrier's focusing more on the regional markets for its restructuring and long-term growth.

The tourist-laden Kalibo-Seoul flights were clipped from two to one a day, while the Manila-Macau segment apparently could not generate enough Filipinos to visit the Chinese gambling mecca that the daily flights had to be slashed to four weekly.

Likewise, there was not enough sustainable traffic between Sabah and Manila in this monsoon season, such that the daily Kota Kinabalu flights were also cut down to four times a week.

PR and 5J simply took their passengers away. If you noticed they are fielding regularly the high density A330 to both CEB and DVO

How can this relate to NAIA not giving them slots when they are actually removing some of them?

[romantic_guy08]

A final farewell to the Queen...

PAL sees off last jumbo jet's final flight

MANILA – Flag carrier Philippine Airlines (PAL) bid good-bye to the last Boeing 747-400 jumbo jet, as it sets off its final commercial flight on Friday night for San Francisco before returning to Manila early-morning Monday.

The flight draws to a close an illustrious 35 years of memorable flying experience both for passengers and PAL crew members.

The last arrival, PR 105, will be given a water-canon salute by airport firetrucks when it lands at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport on September 1.

The title “flagship aircraft” was transferred from the B747-400 to the B777-300ER in an emotional ceremony on May 12 at Villamor Air Base in Pasay City. The original jumbo jet—the B747 series 200—arrived in Manila in December 1979. It required several airport-terminal facilities modifications due to its size.

PAL deployed the B747s on its long-haul and high-density routes, such as North America, Europe, Australia and the Middle East. PAL pioneered using full-flat beds, called Skybeds, for first-class passengers installed on the upper deck of the B747s.

The last PAL B747-400, with registry number RP-C7473, joined the fleet on April 1, 1995.

The first PAL B747-400 arrived in November 1993 from the Boeing manufacturing plant in Seattle, Washington, USA, carrying former President Fidel V. Ramos, who attended the Apec meeting in Seattle.

PAL said that it is retiring its Boeing B747 aircraft to give way for the full utilization of Boeing 777-300 series.

Courtesy of Millano Macatula/PPSG

[Evodesire]

Anyone noticed huge improvements in PAL's marketing? They are more aggressive now, they got better ads than before, their social media has greatly improved, and it seems they now have a professional graphic designer.

[seven13]

Got the same unconfirmed news that LT bought it back already.

[Evodesire]

Mixed feelings inside PAL, some of the crew like the LT times because better because they had more benefits and they were a full legacy carrier. But most likes RSA's term because of newer destinations, new aircraft, and they feel the improvement in terms of stability.

[romantic_guy08]

Last arrival in MNL for her majesty...

c/o GMANEWS.TV

[Arianespace]

seven13 wrote

Got the same unconfirmed news that LT bought it back already.

And the news story for the week past is that no new offer was made by LTG acceptable to SMC.

Meanwhile, this came out in the inquirer this morning, apparently extending the deadline this week. I will stand on my earlier remarks on this issue.

People waiting for the resolution of negotiations on full ownership of Philippine Airlines (PAL) between business tycoons Lucio Tan and Ramon Ang will have to hold their collective breath a little while longer.

The decision on the part of Tan on whether he would ante up his earlier buyback offer to Ang was expected to come last week at the end of the traditional Chinese “ghost month” (which was supposed to be an inauspicious time for making big business deals).

In any case, the Aug. 27 target date for a deal came and went without any new offer being made to San Miguel Corp. (Recall that Tan initially offered a $372-million cash payment up front and another $800 million in installment over two years for SMC’s 49 percent of PAL. SMC wants everything in cash, up front.)

According to our source, the new deadline for Tan to raise the cash for the buyback is the end of this week.

“We’ll know by Friday if we have a deal or not,” said one company official familiar with the talks.

That means PAL’s stakeholders and employees will be on tenterhooks for at least five more days before a resolution becomes apparent.

[seven13]

PR to start MNL-YVR-JFK vv onboard A340 starting Mar2015

PR126 2350MNL-2050YVR2250-0700JFK
PR127 1100JFK-1350YVR1520-2050MNL

YYZ to start 4th frequency using 77W

[romantic_guy08]

seven13 wrote

PR to start MNL-YVR-JFK vv onboard A340 starting Mar2015

PR126 2350MNL-2050YVR2250-0700JFK
PR127 1100JFK-1350YVR1520-2050MNL

YYZ to start 4th frequency using 77W

Now bookable via Travelocity... not yet in the PR website...