CJAContinental From United Kingdom, joined May 2006, 459 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2423 times:
Will the mergers employ one brand for both airlines, or keep the two brands like KLM-AIR FRANCE? Personally, I'd prefer if the two brands were kept, I would have also thought that this would be most beneficial for the airlines involved.
Centrair From Japan, joined Jan 2005, 3597 posts, RR: 21 Reply 1, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2404 times:
Does the KL/AF merger have something to do with domicile?
I thought it might be good for say DL/NW to have a new parent company and then keep two mainline brands, but in the end it might be confusing. Yet...they could make the "mainline" be one name and then use the other name as restricted sub carrier. Kind of like Cathay and Dragonair. Both are part of the Swire group and carry out different mission and with different product styles. Cathay is higher-grade, can do longer routes and operates only widebodies, while Dragonair does some regional wide-body routes but also has a fleet of narrow-bodies.
Branding is hard and a company likes to keep its brands clear. Remember the NEW coke? Bad Branding idea.
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
FlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 6863 posts, RR: 11 Reply 2, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2342 times:
I don't see this being necessary in the US market. The "cost savings" that can be realized in a truly merged company, i.e., same name, same HQ, same operating certificate, one work-force, etc cannot be seen in two sepearate companies. With two foreign "state" airlines if you will, that's another story. And as it has been stated before, if AF could makr AF-KLM one company, they would.
CAM2:"Lightning coming out of that one." CAM1: "What?"
RoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9141 posts, RR: 52 Reply 3, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2163 times:
It doesn't make sense to keep two brands. The names Northwest and Delta are brands and identities, but they do not represent countries like Air France/KLM. Airline brands in the United States come and go. When AA and TWA joined together, there were two very strong brand names there, but in the end one just disappeared. Airlines put a lot of money into investing in their brand name. From advertising to credit cards, they work to create a brand that people recognize. One cohesive brand makes an airline stronger.
Now the companies behind those brands are different. Keeping separate identities may happen for a while. The people behind the airlines could remain rather separate. However the uniforms and paint on the outside of the airplanes need to be the same.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
Justlump From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 154 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1994 times:
Branding does have an effect. However, out in the field, you would be shocked at how many passengers have no idea which carrier they have booked for their flight. They show up at the airport, walk to the nearest counter and claim to booked on the flight that leaves around 1pm. They have no paperwork, they are unsure of their carrier, and they have no idea which connecting hub they will travel through. This seems crazy, but it happens dozens of times a week.