-
Hi, I am just wondering if any has any info or has heard anything on the grape vine about when/if BA are going to return to doing direct flights to Bangkok or anywhere else in Thailand?
Probably not before winter 33/25 at the earliest.
Nothing new since the last time this was asked.
Very unlikely BA would restart BKK again.
Can a B788 fly LHR-BKK fully loaded or would the route need a larger aircraft?
I am told BA are returning to BKK, just not now.
a) BA has no spare long haul aircraft after retiring the 747s and the 77X is delayed until 2026
b) Bangkok flights are full of cheapskates, effectively, with no-one willing to pay £10k to sit up front (and even if they did, it is still a bad deal for BA vs putting on another NYC flight where people pay £10k upfront for just 6 hours)
a) BA has no spare long haul aircraft after retiring the 747s and the 77X is delayed until 2026
b) Bangkok flights are full of cheapskates, effectively, with no-one willing to pay £10k to sit up front (and even if they did, it is still a bad deal for BA vs putting on another NYC flight where people pay £10k upfront for just 6 hours)
I dont think you should classify someone who is not willing to spend £10k on an airline ticket as a cheapskate but perhaps those that do as having more money than sense?
also b)is simply wrong as many airlines fly and sell F to BKK even when they have other aircraft with F cabins. BA used to fly F to BKK twice daily, if there is any truth in this comment it is simply that BA has lost the market, not that the market is not there.
@Richie, yrs, a 778 can fly nonstop to BKK.Bangkok flights are full of cheapskates, effectively, with no-one willing to pay £10k to sit up front (and even if they did, it is still a bad deal for BA vs putting on another NYC flight where people pay £10k upfront for just 6 hours)
Always curious as to how others make it pay. I’ve flown the route twice with Austrian and SWISS in the past year and both flights were 777 absolutely packed in all cabins.
“Bangkok flights are full of cheapskates”
Another Rob special to add to the list!This is not view, this is the BA view. They can make substantially more money running aircraft on routes where people are willing to pay more.
BA is a ruthlessly efficient business and it would be back in Bangkok like a shot (and Kuala Lumpur etc etc) if they thought it could make any money.
Comparing any route to New York/London would be unfavourable but there is a reason to fly even without profit, and that is either to hurt the competition or attract/retain customers.
For example, some people who choose how they fly may do so on the basis that they are working towards a more leisure destination in their own time. The network needs carrots on the end of their sticks. Even if those carrots are a mere illusion.
Bangkok flights are full of cheapskates, effectively, with no-one willing to pay £10k to sit up front (and even if they did, it is still a bad deal for BA vs putting on another NYC flight where people pay £10k upfront for just 6 hours)
Always curious as to how others make it pay. I’ve flown the route twice with Austrian and SWISS in the past year and both flights were 777 absolutely packed in all cabins.
Doesn’t necessarily mean that it is a particularly lucrative route. BA could fill flights if they started today but not at the levels of profitability they require.
The LH group doesn’t have the same alternative options (of richer routes) from ZRH/VIE and anyway doesn’t have anything like the financial discipline of BA. Additionally, there are some formal and informal agreements with governments made at the time of the takeovers about maintaining direct flights at those hubs.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Popular articles this week:
