DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7673 posts, RR: 18 Posted (12 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1640 times:
Over the past several years British Airways has expanded service to many 2-nd tier US cities like PHX, DEN, and CLT. Now with Lufthansa finalizing the decision with new service to PHX or DEN... will other major European carriers be following suit? My best guess, not much of a guess really, would be for KLM or Air France. The next two largest carriers in Europe. What are the aviation treaties like between The Netherlands, France, and the US that would let them expand. And do their alliance agreements, mostly KLM/NW prohibit or push them away from opening up new routes to the US?
Any thoughts are appreciated.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
AFa340-300E From France, joined May 1999, 2084 posts, RR: 28 Reply 1, posted (12 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1544 times:
As far as France and Air France are concerned:
The current agreement between the two countries are a step-by-step access to Open Sky. This agreement reached in 1998 means that every year carriers from both countries are awarded new frequencies and/or new routes (like the recent award for AA, DL and UA).
Regarding the alliance agreement between Air France and Delta Air Lines, reached in June 1999:
The two airline have to get the agreement of their partner for 2/3 of their planned growth on North Atlantoc. For the other 1/3, they are free to do what they want, without any approval from the partner.
747firstclass From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (12 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1533 times:
Germany and the Netherlands have openskies agreements with the US now. France has one that is being phased in until April, 2003 when it becomes open skies. There has been some talk, so that Air france may cooperate more closely with DL that France may advance that date. The latest rumor from the UK is that they are offering a 5 year phased in openskies wiht the US. I am not so sure that the US will accept that long. Plus it would only put BA further and further behind the curve. I think BA will very soon team up with KLM/NW and under pressure from them agree to an immediate openskies. As soon as there is openskies in all of the UK, including LHR, the BA/KLM/NW Alliance will be on the move in the US. When that happens I think Spain will sign an openskies with the US. Which alliance they will go with who knows? So that would leave Greece as the only country in western Europe without an openskies agreement with the US. I also think that once the British sign an openskies agreement with the US, soon...very soon afterward France will speed up tehir process. The bottom lone is the UK can not hold out much longer. They are falling further and further behind the curve.
Billy From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2000, 895 posts, RR: 8 Reply 3, posted (12 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1511 times:
Do not forget that Ireland does not have open skies with the US either. It will be interesting to see if they drop the protective conditions for Shannon to fall in line with other open sky countries. Whilst the UK does not sign, other countries (such as Greece and Ireland) feel no pressure to open up.
Far from expanding in the US, I think that KLM will close a couple of routes this winter, and maintain access via the NW hubs. If KLM does not pull them, I think that Martinair might pick them up instead. Florida seems vulnerable.
Blink182 From Azerbaijan, joined Oct 1999, 5430 posts, RR: 19 Reply 4, posted (12 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1503 times:
747firstclass,I couldn't have said it better. The UK is a strong country and has a lot of power and a tiger economy. But they cannon hold out longer,soon they will be forced into it due to the competition and knowing that BA and AA can't link up because of this.There are also over a hundred daily flights from the UK to the USA and for an international flight,that is a helluva lot.There is also so much demand for that route and its almost at the seams which will break.
For a carrier, I think it will be AirFrance or Lufthansa, I think Swissair,AerLingus and KLM will soon follow up. I say AF first because they already serve IAH but they announced that they were going to start a CDG-DFW and a CDG-DTW route and I think PHX will soon follow and SEA(if they don't already serve SEA) will than follow,I wouldn't look for DEN to be serve for awhile...if it ever does get AF flights.
Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
747firstclass From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (12 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1495 times:
Dont forget that Virgin is also interested in this extra city. There has been some speculation that BA may try and go into MSP before the proposed KLM merger. This according to BA management would be to try and intimidate KLM into accepting BAs financial terms for the merger. Should be interesting.
AFa340-300E From France, joined May 1999, 2084 posts, RR: 28 Reply 6, posted (12 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1498 times:
Actually Air France doesn't fly to SEA.
The French newspaper 'Les Echos' had announced Air France was looking at DFW, PHL and DTW for the next years. Now CDG-PHL has been opened, we should see CDG-DFW and CDG-DTW soon. Even more with the current orders for long-haulers and with the planned growth on North America (Air France has annouced this is their focus-market for now, and they are keen to grow there).
As for DEN, Mr. Spinetta, AF's CEO, had announced DEN wouldn't be opened "before 2003". Also Mr. Webb, Mayer of Denver, has been courting Air France for a DEN for quite a qhile now. And according to Denver Post's sources, DEN would actually be on Air France's list, but "not at the top" for now.
Will the blow of the cooperation between Lufthansa and United make DEN move higher on Air France's list?
Nickofatlanta From Australia, joined May 2000, 1457 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (12 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1480 times:
"Regarding the alliance agreement between Air France and Delta Air Lines, reached in June 1999:
The two airline have to get the agreement of their partner for 2/3 of their planned growth on North Atlantoc. For the other 1/3, they are free to do what they want, without any approval from the partner."
Is this only on French routes or on all transatlantic routes. If so, when DL added a 3rd ATL - LGW flight or started seasonal ATL - ATH, they had to get AF approval?
AFa340-300E From France, joined May 1999, 2084 posts, RR: 28 Reply 9, posted (12 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1473 times:
I think this is for all the European routes. This makes more sense.
Regarding ATL-LGW and ATL-ATH: that's not sure. Maybe the larger capacities put on CDG were already filling in for the 2/3, and these routes were part of the 1/3.
Nonetheless this agreement doesn't mean 2/3 of the DL growth to Europe will be on CDG, and 2/3 of Air France's on ATL for example. Maybe Air France wanted CDG-PHL and Delta Air Lines wanted another ATL-LGW and both agreed.
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7673 posts, RR: 18 Reply 10, posted (12 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1451 times:
Thanks for all the input. It seems that the alliances are actually making expansion more complicated than it would otherwise be.
I'd personally see KLM as being the next to expand, for several reasons. 1. First of all many of these new markets could also be very profitable from a freight standpoint... which would benefit KLM by using their 747M's. 2. The Netherlands has open skies and is somewhat underserved from the US... nowhere near as much service as their is to LHR/LGW, CDG, or FRA.
The only obstabcle to this is how the KLM/NW agreement works. Would they rather feed pax through MSP and DTW to AMS? Martinair could be a possibility. But would they be able to do 6 or 7 weekly flights to a new city or two?
I never actually thought of Virgin... them seem to be itching to get more service too. It would be interesting to see them compete with BA on LGW-PHX... doubt that would happen though.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
Nickofatlanta From Australia, joined May 2000, 1457 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (12 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1418 times:
SR has added several new cities in the past couple of years: SFO, MIA for example. Where else would they fly to? I could perhaps see GVA - ORD. I think I read somewhere that they were considering a flight to MCO. Possibly through their Balair division? You may see Crossair start some transatlantics using 737s according to an article in an industry periodical I read.
Avion From Bouvet Island, joined May 1999, 2205 posts, RR: 8 Reply 16, posted (12 years 8 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1415 times:
SRs US network currently consists of:
Los Angeles daily MD11
San Francisco daily MD11
Miami daily MD11
Atlanta daily MD11
Chicago daily MD11
WashingtonIAD daily A330-200
New York 5x daily MD11 and A330-200
Boston 2x daily A330-200
Next up on the list are:
Dallas to be flown by an MD11
Las Vegas to be flown by an A330-200
Orlando to be flown by a 767 (if the 767 gets choosen Balair will operate that flight for Swissair) or A330-200