Flight209 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 78 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2716 times:
The recent announcement of CO's intent to switch from SkyTeam to Star Alliance is a bit bittersweet for me. One part of me thinks that CO and *A would fit very well with each other, but another part of me sees the combination of CO's impending withdrawals from some airports and the possible exit of US from *A as being too detrimental to the alliance's ability to cover certain parts of the United States.
Take my "backyard" of East Tennessee, for example. US serves all three of the region's commercial airports -- CHA (from CLT and DCA), TYS (from CLT, DCA, and PHL), and TRI (from CLT). Meanwhile, UA confines its East Tennessee presence to TYS, and CO will do the same once it ends service to CHA on September 3 -- well before CO can realistically change alliances even if approval and completion of the DL / NW merger get fast-tracked.
If US gets to stay in *A once CO comes aboard, then the relatively meager status quo for the alliance at CHA and TRI will prevail. OTOH, if CO's entry into *A is coupled with an exit by US, then not only would TYS become *A's only East Tennessee destination, but the northern (TRI) and southern (CHA) fringes of the region would suddenly find themselves with "fortress spokes" for DL / NW and SkyTeam. (As for Oneworld, AA doesn't serve TRI at all and gives CHA only two daily flights from ORD and one daily flight from DFW.) While travelers in CHA's catchment area could still go to one of five other airports (in clockwise order, TYS, ATL, BHM, HSV, and BNA) within a two-and-a-half-hour drive from downtown Chattanooga in order to fly CO or UA (not to mention LH from ATL or AC from either ATL or BNA), and anyone in the Tri-Cities could still drive two or so hours to either AVL (to fly CO) or TYS (to take either CO or UA), the persistent escalation of oil prices (the apparent culprit behind CO's plan to leave CHA) is making such long drives to airports ever less appealing.
[Edited 2008-06-24 22:14:32]
I may question your opinion, but I'll never question your right to it.
Davescj From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 2305 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 1 day ago) and read 2439 times:
I don't see US going out of *A instantly...so far, at least, US has said their agreements with UA will remain in place. What will actually happen, of course, is another question. I really wonder if US will become the 3rd wheel that CO was in Skyteam. But, even there, CO was around quite a while.
LGAUAOK From United States of America, joined May 2008, 39 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2021 times:
Wow Flight209 you have a lot to say in your opening... but I just want to say I am not bittersweet about CO entering STAR... I jumped for joy! New York will now have a STAR option! And I will now be selecting CO on my flights to AMS!
And as for US , they need STAR more then STAR needs them, I don't think US will be leaving until WN buys them up, then chops them up, and starts there new international routes on brank new Airbus aircraft......
So I do not see Airports loosing STAR, in fact, in Airport count, the only looser I see is SkyTeam.
(Hope I did not upset anyone, but would love to hear your feedback)
Ca2ohhp From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 954 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (6 years 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1921 times:
Quoting LGAUAOK (Reply 3): And as for US , they need STAR more then STAR needs them, I don't think US will be leaving until WN buys them up, then chops them up, and starts there new international routes on brank new Airbus aircraft......
You've been hanging around crew lounges too long.
Skyteam consists(ed) of CO, DL (who both have considerable overlap), NW so I don't see the difference with *A when CO is thrown in.
Eghansen From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (6 years 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1788 times:
Quoting MSYPI7185 (Reply 5): I do not know why some think because CO joins *A that US will leave. Did US state something that I am missing, or just wishful thinking on the part of some a-neters? *A will be fine with UA, US & CO.
I can't see *A dropping USAir either. *A seems to want to be the "biggest with the mostest" and they want all the airlines they can get.
USAir may be marginal to *A, but the same could be said about BMI, Spanair or LOT, and they remain in the alliance.