Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10193 posts, RR: 62 Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4588 times:
About frigging time BA got serious about this. Iberia and BA belong together, if for no other reason than that they are now the only two major carriers left in Europe that still haven't merged with/taken over partner airlines to broaden their network. BA and Iberia have networks that are highly complimentary, and with the new T4 at Madrid and upcoming new T5 at Heathrow, the London-Madrid axis will give them a powerfully competitive value proposition to lure customers onto the larger BA-IB-oneworld network.
PRAirbus From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2005, 1019 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4152 times:
Good, it makes sense BA/IB in order to keep oneworld's integrity especially since BA/AA lack anti-trust immunity over transatlantic sectors. I doubt the EU would allow AF or LH to acquire IB since those two airlines have already swallowed other European carriers and both dominate a wide number of markets in Europe needless to mention they have flexible agreements w/their American counterparts. AA/BA should get anti-trust approval, the LHR/UK Open Skies has already been opened...what else do they want??? It should be fair for AA/BA since AF/KL/Skyteam and LH have a vast competitive alliance. BA should grab IB at all cost.
Rafabozzolla From Brazil, joined Apr 2000, 1165 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3773 times:
Their intercontinental networks do complement each other. Only BOS, JFK, MIA, ORD, MEX, GRU, GIG, EZE, DKR, LOS and JNB overlap. But it seems a bit western-centric and they would still need a stronger Central European hub (HEL and BUD are much too small).
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Reply 8, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3620 times:
Quoting PRAirbus (Reply 4): Good, it makes sense BA/IB in order to keep oneworld's integrity especially since BA/AA lack anti-trust immunity over transatlantic sectors.
StarGoldLHR From Heard and McDonald Islands, joined Feb 2004, 1529 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2309 times:
Havent AA just removed the ability to earn status miles on any BA flight ??
I knew previously you couldnt earn miles crossing the Atlantic, but not even status miles on BA European or Asia flights is a bit tight fisted... One Worlds falling apart not coming together... hence I never fly with it yet have 1.5 mn miles in Sky Team and Star Alliance instead.
So far in 2008 45 flights and Gold already. JFK, IAD, LGA, SIN, HKG, NRT, AKL, PPT, LAX still to book ! Home Airport LCY
JMULAH From Spain, joined Nov 2007, 61 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2226 times:
I rather see IB on it's own, but I can honestly see BA/IB as a partnership, especially when OW is their alliance.
What IB needs is someone like the Marsans group to make them big. Then it would be another different story! (IB with PTV's? it will come but we have to be patient)
Wolflair From Mexico, joined Sep 2007, 168 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1688 times:
Such a bid could trigger a bidding battle like Barclays vs. RBS consortium for ABN. Be sure that if BA goes for IB, LH would not sit tight without giving a battle. Whilst AZ may be a target for LH, IB makes more sense for them since they won't have the massive burden of the AZ's unions.
Quoting Rafabozzolla (Reply 6): Only BOS, JFK, MIA, ORD, MEX, GRU, GIG, EZE, DKR, LOS and JNB overlap.
From those destinations, EZE, MEX, MIA and maybe GRU/GIG serve 2 different markets. There is a huge Latinamerican expat population in Spain (and viceversa) that would make those destinations even better server should a merger occur. For example, IB serves MX 14x while BA does it only 4x. However, there is definitely market for even more frequencies (IB cannot add more as they have reached the max on the bilateral)
JMM -A319,A320,A321,A333,A343,AT45,AT72,B462,B722,B737s from -200 to -800,B744,B752,B762,B763,BE35,DC91,F70,Ju52,MD80,S3
VV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 6631 posts, RR: 17 Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1639 times:
Quoting Wolflair (Reply 12): Such a bid could trigger a bidding battle like Barclays vs. RBS consortium for ABN. Be sure that if BA goes for IB, LH would not sit tight without giving a battle.
BA already own 10 per cent of IB and have options to buy 29 per cent more. So to win IB in a battle LH requires 82 per cent of all of IB's non-spoken for equity while BA requires less than a quarter of that at 18 per cent. And if LH bid high to ensure they get the support they need to win IB the main cash winner will be BA.
Although there is talk of LH and AZ as well as IB, BD should not be forgotten. I believe that LH have an option to buy Michael Bishop's majority share holding in BD and that that option could come up next year. But if LH load themselves with debt to buy AZ and/or IB where would they get the cash to buy BD and its valuable LHR slots?
So it is my view that either BA will get IB or IB will remain independent at least for the time being and that LH will not enter any battle..
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10193 posts, RR: 62 Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1626 times:
Quoting Wolflair (Reply 12): Such a bid could trigger a bidding battle like Barclays vs. RBS consortium for ABN. Be sure that if BA goes for IB, LH would not sit tight without giving a battle.
As VV701 said, while there definitely are still hurdles to clear, this deal is essentially BA's to lose. Because they already own 10% of Iberia, and have first right of refusal on a further (approximately) 30%, they already stand to almost control Iberia no questions asked, without any possibility of interference or "battle" from anyone. If BA wants to control 39% of Iberia, they can tomorrow, without any difficulty. So, of course, they would have to fight for another 11% +1 share in order to gain full control of Iberia, and other bidders like perhaps AF-KL, LH, other banking consortiums, etc. might well battle them for that. But again, as VV said, those other bidders would have a very difficult time in gaining full control of Iberia when a single shareholder - BA, hypothetically - would control nearly 2/5 of all the votes. With that amount of power, it wouldn't be too challenging for BA to find another sizeable voting blog representing at least 11% +1 share of the remaining equity to go along with them.
Again, from my perspective: if BA wants this deal (BA-IB merger) to happen, it will happen. Simple as that.
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 394 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 10193 posts, 
From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2005, 1019 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Apr 2000, 1165 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 4848 posts, 
From Venezuela, joined Jan 2006, 490 posts, 
From Heard and McDonald Islands, joined Feb 2004, 1529 posts, 
From Spain, joined Nov 2007, 61 posts, 
From Mexico, joined Sep 2007, 168 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
