Using two Boeing 747s, Oasis Hong Kong is selling return flights for about £150 ( 224). Sounds good. There's a 'but'. Taxes and a fuel surcharge will almost double the figure. Still, that's significantly less than the cheapest flights on offer from other carriers such as Cathay Pacific and British Airways.

There's another caveat.

When the fledgling airline began selling tickets just under a month ago, just 10% were on offer at the lowest price. Consumers didn't seem too bothered. Oasis has been selling an average of 1,100 tickets a day.

The big question of course, is whether this exercise is doomed before the first flight ever leaves the tarmac. Commercial long-haul travel is as yet unproven.

Oasis passengers will receive a free meal, but will certainly be paying for some other previously standard fare. They can upgrade meals to 'gourmet' (if any food served in any class of any airline can be described as such) and can also buy 'noise cancelling headsets' on board.

Will they pay for extras?

Co-founder, chairman and property mogul Reverend Raymond Lee will be praying they do. He said in a recent interview that Oasis will be "governed by biblical principles". Free passenger bibles might, however, send out the wrong safety message. Oasis is confident enough of success that management is even considering a share sale.

Bob Mann, influential New York-based airline analyst and consultant, contends that the replication of the Oasis model on routes across the Atlantic is an inevitability.

"There certainly are opportunities to offer a product that people are willing to pay for in steps, or on an a la carte basis, that responds to customer needs, " Mann told the Sunday Tribune. "The question is what sort of competitive response will result."

He said business air fares continue to generate revenue well in excess of cost. Some of the highest margins worldwide for business-class fares exist on routes such as London-Hong Kong or LondonTokyo, for example.

"What this will ultimately come down to, for business travellers at least, is the issue of price versus convenience and frequency, " said Mann.

"You need to have a decent level of service recovery as well, so that if an aircraft is out of action passengers aren't left stranded."

Arguably the most significant difference between longhaul and short-haul low-cost flights will be turnaround times. Carriers such as Ryanair need to have an aircraft ready to fly again within 30 minutes of arrival in order to gain efficiencies that help propel profitability.

Long-haul flights will be unable to replicate that part of the model, and the aircraft will have lower utilisation levels, which could stall growth and play havoc with making profits.

Even at the moment, carriers such as Aer Lingus deliver far better yields on transatlantic flights from passengers in first class who pay roughly seven times more than their economy counterparts. A long-haul carrier with cheaper business class tickets and cheaper economy fares will have trouble making the sums add up.

John Sheehan, an analyst with NCB stockbrokers, doesn't foresee any transatlantic low-cost carriers emerging for the time being.

"Certainly at the moment aircraft and fuel costs are high, " he said. "Even so, longhaul airfares have already come down substantially in the past number of years."

Ryanair chief executive Michael O'Leary recently suggested that the airline might in the future look at tying itself into a third-party transatlantic carrier. But such a move would be unrealistic for Ryanair.

"When you start getting into hubs and spokes you can run into all sorts of delays, " Sheehan explained. "If an airline has a departure from Dublin to Alicante in the early morning, for example, you want to be able to get it moving on time. You don't want to be waiting because you're holding on for 20 passengers from the New York flight. Neither Ryanair nor Aer Lingus want to be doing that."