EK156 From United Arab Emirates, joined May 2005, 765 posts, RR: 3 Posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3982 times:
After London Won the bid to host the Olympic Games in 2012, I am guessing there will be a battle between the airlines to becoming the Official Carrier of the games in 2012. Any Suggestions who might it be?
I am guessing these Airlines will out in a bid for it:
Virgin, Emirates, British Airways, Singapore Airlines, Cathay Pacific, Qatar Airways and Etihad.
JBLUA320 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3163 posts, RR: 20 Reply 1, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3971 times:
I think Virgin Atlantic will be the ultimate carrier of the Olympics this time...
Uadc8contrail From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, RR: 10 Reply 2, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3967 times:
british airways all the way...they are the only true flag carrier in the uk......sir richard has pimped out the virgin name to all corners of the world and he derserves nothing.......
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21044 posts, RR: 60 Reply 3, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3944 times:
I love how EK156 has 3 of 7 choices being from the middle east, but excludes large European and American carriers, which of course include many of the largest airlines in the world.
You have to applaud his regional pride.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Danialanwar From Switzerland, joined Mar 2001, 421 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3933 times:
Quoting Uadc8contrail (Reply 2): british airways all the way...they are the only true flag carrier in the uk
that status didnt help Qantas for the Sydney Olympics in 2000. Ansett got it. Just about one year before going out of business. Hmmm, are these onimous signs?
Best Business Class: Royal Brunei. Best Economy: Singapore Airlines. First: please send money first!
AlanUK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3921 times:
Does it really matter who is the "official" sponsor? The real question is: which airline will benefit most from the games in London? And the answer here is without a doubt BA, as they are the biggest player in LHR/LGW.
CXoneWorld From Australia, joined Aug 2004, 311 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3896 times:
Could we see both BA and VS sharing the title since they are both official sponsors for the bid to begin with? Anyway the point is BA has already wasted no time to capitalise on the London's win.
Uadc8contrail From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, RR: 10 Reply 9, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3875 times:
DANIALANWAR,
Status didnt help QF in the 2002 olympics????ARE you for real????just because AN got the bid for official carrier means about as much as ual is the official carrier for the taste of chicago....nothing.....all ual did was comp the flights for the chefs and thats it.....QFs reach outta syd was far more than AN could ever realize.......VS outta london is pretty much maxed out as far as seats go and they would be hard pressed to even come close to what BA has as far as seats go.........if i were sir richards private bitch i would exploit the positives that VS has going into LON for all the athletes that are expected....
ZSOFN From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1394 posts, RR: 7 Reply 10, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3850 times:
For a start, it WILL be a British carrier. Anything else really would be ridiculous, think about it. There's so much national pride surrounding London's successful bid and that can only continue. I really wouldn't be surprised if we see both BA and VS this time, as was for the bidding support. VS may be small but SRB isn't - he's the sort of guy I'd expect to make sure he's at the forefront of all this.
Scbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 11447 posts, RR: 50 Reply 11, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3846 times:
Quoting Uadc8contrail (Reply 9): VS outta london is pretty much maxed out as far as seats go and they would be hard pressed to even come close to what BA has as far as seats go.........
Zonky From New Zealand, joined Nov 2004, 432 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3839 times:
Quoting ZSOFN (Reply 10): For a start, it WILL be a British carrier.
Why? BA really don't need to pay over the odds for it - i suspect if you asked the general public they would assume BA was anyway (see qantas @ sydney). You might expect EK (or others) will be prepared to stump up the hard cash.
Hard cash is what the olympics, especially hosting them, are about- recouping costs.
Uadc8contrail From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, RR: 10 Reply 13, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3846 times:
Scbriml,
you and i have a better chance of hitting the american powerball/mega millions than VS getting the 380 off 9L at LHR....BY 2014 AT THE EARLIEST....
Aloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4398 posts, RR: 17 Reply 14, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3824 times:
I'll be surprised if anyone other than BA becomes the official airline of the Olympics. I think the only one that could stand a chance would be Virgin....but I just don't see it being anyone other than British Airways.
ZSOFN From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1394 posts, RR: 7 Reply 15, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3786 times:
Quoting Zonky (Reply 12): Why? BA really don't need to pay over the odds for it - i suspect if you asked the general public they would assume BA was anyway (see qantas @ sydney).
Yes, but Ansett was also Australian - you could draw a vague comparison with VS to Ansett as the underdog, so if it's not BA then it'll be VS - they'd JUMP at the chance.
Sure, EK has sponsored events in other cities before, but not the olympics! It's way too big an event, plus come on, they don't have the slots nor would they get them. BA are the only real possibility!
Zonky From New Zealand, joined Nov 2004, 432 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3780 times:
Quoting ZSOFN (Reply 15): Sure, EK has sponsored events in other cities before, but not the olympics! It's way too big an event, plus come on, they don't have the slots nor would they get them. BA are the only real possibility!
It is not a 'privilige' you audtion your suitability for. It's cold hard cash paid for for the marketing benefits of being the 'official' airline. BA really don't need to pay for it. I would imagine most travellers will 'assume' they are anyway if asked.
The 2012 organising team could be clueless and accept a lower offer, but i imagine many local tax payers would be rather annoyed if they did.
ZSOFN From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1394 posts, RR: 7 Reply 17, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3767 times:
Zonky, I do see your point, and I may indeed be wrong. I just think that BA would be prepared to pay for it knowing that if they don't VS will push as hard as they can. Also the taxpayers might not be happy about a foreign carrier being the official airline! I know what I'd rather see...
Why not have quite a few carriers from different regions/continents? Sa UA or AA from north america; they already have quite a presence at LHR, with AA and also DL at LGW. SAA I'm sure would love to represent those from Africa, trying even now to market themselves as the airline of Africa. The potential list goes on...
Uadc8contrail From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, RR: 10 Reply 18, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3759 times:
BD has a better chance of landing the "official"carrier status than VS does....if BA does not the nod...BA all the way....richard is still trying to pry off those "no way aa/ba"stickers....
ZSOFN From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1394 posts, RR: 7 Reply 19, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3753 times:
Quoting Uadc8contrail (Reply 18): richard is still trying to pry off those "no way aa/ba"stickers....
That's my point - I actually think Richard will want to make a point of putting up a higher bid than BA if he can. Thus there's much more motivation for VS than BD who have a tendency to stay out of these things and just make the most of being in Star. When did you last see a promotional scheme on their a/c other than Star? Granted they expanding out of LHR longhaul at the moment, but so are VS to a greater extent.
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3751 times:
I bet there'll be an Official Airline Alliance of these Olympics, rather than just an airline. If it was just an Official Airline, it would be a British airline, no question. They're not about to pick Emirates.
ZSOFN From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1394 posts, RR: 7 Reply 22, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3739 times:
JGPH1A, I agree. Here's a thought - VS and BD have / had some sort of alliance - when I got some miles with VS I was able to spend them on a european BD flight. If that's the case, how feasible would it be to see them put in a joint bid?
By the way, did London win the Olympic bid with "cold hard cash"? There are always other factors, and in this case that includes practical ones.
JGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 23, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3737 times:
Quoting Zonky (Reply 21): They bloddy well better pick the highest bidder. I fail to see why we should subsidise BA/VS/BD's promotional ability via london council taxes bills!
They probably will, but they will probably only solicit bids from British airlines. Easy.
ZSOFN From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1394 posts, RR: 7 Reply 24, posted (7 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3732 times:
For all we know, EK might not even bid. Why would they after all?
25 Gkirk: The official airline will be easyJet or Ryanair.
26 Zonky: Cash/favours, obviously. If the IOC voted on the basis of the technical evaluation of the bids, we'd be talking about CDG & AF.
27 ZSOFN: That's pretty cynical. If that's the case then the whole sporting institution is in jeopardy. If the IOC make such a big deal over being fair, the of
28 Zonky: The olympics is great. Public built and payed for facilities to enable nike to sell trainers. Colour me jaded if you like, but it hasn't been a great
29 Zonky: In any case, it seems london has a lot else on its mind this morning rather than just the olympics.
30 ZSOFN: Zonky, to a certain extent you're totally right. OF COURSE any airline bidding to be the official airline of the olympics has a commercial interest. I
31 UAalltheway: I don't think VS is big enough to be the official airline. They don't have enough domestic E.U. routes. I think British Airways is gonna get this one.
32 ZSOFN: I agree, that's most likely. BA have already put up money for so many projects, particularly in London. Who can forget the London Eye? I've been on i
33 Onedude: Okay.. a couple of things here. I think you mean the 2000 Olympics. Ansett was not the "official" carrier - they were part of a Star bid which won th
34 EK156: I hope that was a compliment...lol Actually I included EK, Etihad and Qatar Airways cause they are pushing to make a mark in the world aviation. Also
35 777STL: Personally, I think you're bloody crazy if you think an airline outside of the UK will become the official airline. It's all about national pride, esp
36 Arsenal@LHR: I'd be amazed if a non-British airline was designated as the official carrier for London 2012. Whether one likes it or not, the Olympic games are abou
37 HighFlyer9790: I think a lot of people would like to see British or Virgin get it, and inevitably it will be one of the two. Traditionally, I think BA will and shoul
38 GDB: Who has not been paying attention then? BA has been a firm supporter of the Olympic bid since day one. Some of our aircraft note this externally. Rod
40 Jmc757: I would certainly put my money on BA. Would be nice to see Virgin, they have been quite vocal about their support for the bid. Perhaps it will be "Off
41 HKGKaiTak: A big part of Sydney's Olympic bid was that they would fly all the athlete's to Sydney for free. Maybe QF knew it already had the "Australian reputat
42 Jfklganyc: I don't know how much BAs 2012 fare sale from the US will help them. Considering London beat out a US city to get the Olympics, its kind of a rub-in-y
43 Ikramerica: it was. regional pride is a good thing. no. it's not the olympics. Most of america really don't care. we were glad to see London get it. honestly. Ma
44 Baw716: Hmmm, Sounds like another VS v. BA battle brewing.... Just watch the organizing committee give it to BMI. That would really piss off SRB and for BA, w
45 JGPH1A: Hehe - that should give the BD route people a headache ? "Do we put the Air Wales ATR on the SYD-SIN-LCY route, or an EMB-145 ?". "We'll need the A33
46 Trekster: BA ALL THE WAY BA fly to every part of the world, and most of europe is covered. VS Only do international flts so people would have to connect to them
47 Keta: There is an official airline too? The Olympic Spirit, I see...
48 ClassicLover: If the fly athletes for free thing is true, you can bet your arse that the government paid the airlines to fly the athletes. Trent.
49 777STL: I don't think the US nor NYC expected to actually get the Olympics. 1984 was in LA, 1996 was in Atlanta, 2002 was in Salt Lake, I think 2006 is in Va
Sponsor Message: 
From United Arab Emirates, joined May 2005, 765 posts, 
From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3163 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Mar 2001, 421 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, 
From Australia, joined Aug 2004, 311 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Nov 2004, 432 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1394 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
