Sponsor Message:
Travel Polls & Prefs Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
DL Cuts T&B Agreements With QR/TK/KU/VV  
User currently offlineusdcaguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 971 posts, RR: 2
Posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3224 times:

Delta announced today through its travel agency portal that it will be ending ticketing and baggage agreements mid-February with Qatar, Turkish, Kuwait Airways and Aerosvit. Apparently, they are wanting to support their partners instead of accepting passengers and bags from these other carriers. Any thoughts on this strategy? Sounds like a great way to force people who have to travel from a DL stronghold to stay on them or their alliance partners unless they want to put up with these risks:

- No combined tickets, so no buying an itinerary involving both DL and, say, QR in the same PNR unless an agency manually tickets the itineraries separately, which basically eliminates buying combined itineraries through the OTAs like Expedia

- Even if someone travels on split tickets, DL or QR will refuse to check backs through to the final destination due to there being no agreement. It will be the responsibility of the passenger to reclaim bags and recheck at the transfer point.

- If something happens to the passenger's bags enroute on one carrier, say QR, they will have to file a claim with QR at the final destination stated on the QR ticket. If they forget to do this, they will not be able to file a claim with DL due to there being no agreement and will have to pick up the phone and call QR and hope they take a claim. Major risk and hassle.

- If the inbound flight of a connecting itinerary is late and the passenger misses the outbound, it will be as though they simply "missed their flight" with all the unintended consequences. Nobody will be legally obligated to lift a finger for them.

So, basically, I see this is a great win for DL, but for people who originate in DL strongholds who like to fly carriers such as QR and TK, they would have fewer options. This could also jeopardize QR or TK eventually serving the DL hubs as they would then miss out on most of the feed. Any thoughts on how this might play out? Is this a true loss for the carriers involved?

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20632 posts, RR: 62
Reply 1, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3165 times:

Nothing nefarious, all of the major airlines are doing it. It has to do with the final round of DOT regulations going into effect this month:

http://www.dot.gov/affairs/2012/dot0812.html



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineusdcaguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 971 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3120 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 1):

Nothing nefarious, all of the major airlines are doing it. It has to do with the final round of DOT regulations going into effect this month:

Sorry, but what about these regulations has to do with DL's T&B agreements with these particular carriers? Why not choose others?


User currently offlinephxa340 From United States of America, joined Mar 2012, 890 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3100 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 1):

Those are from Jan 2012 so this has nothing to do with that. Maybe you posted the wrong article but those regs have been around for a year already.


User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20632 posts, RR: 62
Reply 4, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3072 times:

Quoting phxa340 (Reply 3):
Those are from Jan 2012

Ha! You're right, my bad. Lemme go dig up the right ones.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20632 posts, RR: 62
Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2994 times:

Okay, this is the original e-mail Delta sent out in October, for changes effective in January 2013 for separate tickets:

Delta Provides Clarification on Baggage Check Process when Traveling on Separate Tickets

Now they've expanded to snip out more airlines where they had interline agreements. It all goes back to originating with the new DOT rules, though.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinecv880 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2823 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 5):
Now they've expanded to snip out more airlines where they had interline agreements. It all goes back to originating with the new DOT rules, though.

I believe that it has to do with the absence of E-Ticketing agreements, as in the case of F9.


User currently offlineusdcaguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 971 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2571 times:

Actually, this has nothing to do with the DOT rules or e-ticketing agreements, which they have with these carriers. It has more to do with the fact that DL no longer wants to play North America taxi driver for the gulf carriers. I see this as a rather bold move; they're saying that you should be flying DL and its alliance partners, not those other guys.

User currently offlineusdcaguy From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 971 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2556 times:

Also, I believe VV was thrown in because they may have had clearinghouse payment issues because of their bankruptcy, but don't quote me on that.

User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6170 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2473 times:

Quoting usdcaguy (Thread starter):
So, basically, I see this is a great win for DL, but for people who originate in DL strongholds who like to fly carriers such as QR and TK, they would have fewer options. This could also jeopardize QR or TK eventually serving the DL hubs as they would then miss out on most of the feed. Any thoughts on how this might play out? Is this a true loss for the carriers involved?

Also a way to uninspire TK and QR from starting ATL.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25356 posts, RR: 49
Reply 10, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2464 times:

Its a two sided knife, particularly in TKs case, so turning revenue away can hurt you in other areas.

Sure DL might not like to provide beneficial feed at JFK for TK, but DL's own IST service begs for added beyond traffic connectivity on the Turkey end, and its country sales team works hard to sell DL from places like Ankara, Izmir, Adana which dont have a choice but use TK on the domestic leg.

In case of Turkey, I think this makes the case for staying on TK or within the Star Alliance even more attractive for travellers now versus partial itineraries that made use of DL.

I suspect however TK knew this was coming - they signed up with JetBlue at JFK late last year.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently onlinealfa164 From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 470 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2055 times:

Back when NW was NW and DL was DL, AA announced a new flight from (somewhere) to Minneapolis; NW immediately retaliated by announcing a DFW-LGA flight (which never materialized; apparently cooler heads prevailed).

Now that QR has announced ATH-JFK - a long-time DL route - and TK is making noises about flying IST-ATL, I think I am seeing some of that old NW let-get-back-at-them-somehow at work here. Maybe some of the old NW management is flexing its muscles in Atlanta.

It might make more sense of DL and/or its partners actually flew to destinations within Turkey or throughout the Middle East, but they don't. With VV in bankrupcy and KU probably of minimal importance, they just got thrown in for good measure.

It will be interesting to see if it all sticks....


User currently offlinegoldorak From France, joined Sep 2006, 1843 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1952 times:

The DL announcement is not clear about the following point : do they still accept to check bags on separate tickets within Skyteam airlines ? Example : 1st ticket MCI-ATL on DL and 2nd ticket ATL-AMS on KL.
Thanks


User currently offlineFreshSide3 From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 213 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1935 times:

Quoting usdcaguy (Reply 8):
Also, I believe VV was thrown in because they may have had clearinghouse payment issues because of their bankruptcy, but don't quote me on that.

Probably true. But you would think they would start flying to Kiev again.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Changing Flights With QR posted Sun Dec 12 2010 12:31:47 by seansasLCY
Online Check-in With QR posted Fri May 1 2009 03:30:28 by Pe@rson
Connections With DL In LAX? posted Thu Jul 19 2012 14:26:06 by PHX787
How Does TK Survives With Such High Fares posted Sun Feb 19 2012 11:15:16 by Tupolev160
Help With Seats Reservations On DL posted Mon Oct 3 2011 09:51:51 by sq_ek_freak
DL 757's With Avod posted Tue Jul 19 2011 15:03:54 by runner13
First Bag Free On DL With SkyMiles AmEx Card posted Wed May 5 2010 05:45:40 by iliribdl
How Is Non-Revving With DL Nowadays? posted Wed Mar 31 2010 14:39:04 by c5load
DL Upgrade With Skymiles posted Fri Feb 19 2010 04:27:40 by fghtngsiouxATC
Help Needed With DL Connection At JFK! posted Fri Dec 4 2009 14:44:23 by Vasu