They may not care but it might be too late. There is a huge business traveler market in Central Europe and it is being split between LH and AF/KL. On the long term, those will remain with the most global alliances and I am afraid OW (and BA) will be marginalized.
FLVILLA From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 394 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 7095 times:
Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 3): They may not care but it might be too late. There is a huge business traveler market in Central Europe and it is being split between LH and AF/KL. On the long term, those will remain with the most global alliances and I am afraid OW (and BA) will be marginalized.
Indeed you keep reiterating this point every couple of weeks.
Shock horror, but BA are still here. As is OW. Me thinks the strategists at BA and all of the OW carriers know what theyre doing, they are afterall the most profitable set of carriers going.....so they must be doing something right.
I hope in life i can work to live, not live to work
CXA330300 From South Africa, joined May 2004, 1588 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6911 times:
BA seems to be doing relatively fine for the moment anyway. Besides, they're currently consolidating with IB, which is much, much bigger than OS, SN, or SK. Malev provides good coverage of Central Europe, and BA and Oneworld have other markets in their pockets with the BA-IB consolidation-Spain and Latin America. Finally, BA might have it right in not trying to eat up everything. Consolidation is one thing, but an airline can only manage so many divisions...
The sky is the limit as long as you can stay there
Antonovman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 725 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6797 times:
Quoting Lijnden (Reply 7): Why BA should take over any airline? They are the one that are slowly becoming a prime candidate to be taken over! I am thinking AF/KL or Emirates.
What a load of rubbish.
They are waiting for the AA/BA antitrust to be authorised first, thats the biggest thing on their agenda, then the merger with IB. After that they will maybe start looking around.
Talk about an over-dramatization. Central Europe is but one small region in the world. One world has Fantastic presence in the western hemisphere. With LA, MX, AA and IB/ AA flights to the Caribbean/ Lat America/ South America, they are the dominant force in the hemisphere. One World is also looking at other ways to consolidate their position in the Latin America. They are also very strong in the Pacific and are looking for partners in that region. With RJ covering the Middle East and MA covering central Europe, BA is directing their attention elsewhere. Remember AA/BA are about to cross the ATI hurdle that LH/UA and AF/KL/DL/NW crossed ages ago (unfairly I might add)!
“The moment you doubt whether you can fly, you cease for ever to be able to do it.” J.M. Barrie (Peter Pan)
I wouldn't be surprised if Finnair get closer to BA in the future.
AY have been doing quite well - weak SK being the major reason - but if LH really take SK the picture will change a lot here in up north, LH sure have the muscles to push AY in the corner. And then AY needs the company of some Big Boy in the business, BA being the natural direction. Of course a different story is how BA see things then...
Antonovman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 725 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 6527 times:
Quoting JRadier (Reply 11): Quoting Antonovman (Reply 10):
After that they will maybe start looking around.
And find out there is not much left....
Well I will agree with you there. They have been very cosy with SN for years and its always been predicted they would take them over. The likes of OS would be no use to BA, no historic ties or anything like that. I think they didnt dare go for SN due to the pending anti-trust decision with the USA, they could be afraid to do anything that may rock the boat for that decision.
As you say, byt the time they get anti-trust all the decent airlines would have been taken over
LOT premium passengers are already in LH bag as per Miles&More program integration. LOT as a CE/EE feeder to BA wouldn't work because LHR slots are not available, or their purchase wouldn't make economic sense for relatively low yield markets.
Bottomline, LH has Poland (and CE/EE) very well covered, with or without LOT.
AIR MALTA From Malta, joined Sep 2001, 2574 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 6156 times:
Quoting Anax (Reply 15): BA like a new mother Teresa will buy OA and AZ and they will live happily ever after......
That's what's left now... All the good deals are sealed I guess.
The one interesting airline which is left now in Europe is Air Berlin. It could be a good addition to BA's network along FlyNiki. They are good quality LCCs with some kind of frills. If BA wants to have some presence in Central Europe, that's the only hope...
CityofAthens From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6092 times:
When someone here talks of Eastern Europe, may I ask for a clarification of which markets are being discussed? As we know BA, already covers the main capitals of Europe in addition to some secondary cities.
Budapest, Bucharest, Prague, Kiev, Sofia, Belgrade, Tirana, Moscow, St.Petersburg are all already covered by BA - MA operates to other cities in the region.
Mutu From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 545 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5151 times:
Quoting AIR MALTA (Reply 17): That's what's left now... All the good deals are sealed I guess.
what about just setting up local bases under the BA banner, cheaper option, less risky, more focussed (you dont inherit problems), significantly more flexible approach to the market.
Do the IB deal then get closer to AY
Feed traffic into HEL (asia) LHR (North america) and MAD (south america) for longhaul.
In the meantime the big airlines like LH and AFKL will start lookimng for efficiencies and there is no doubt in my mind whatever assurances they give now, over time they will gradually drop much longhaul from VIE CPN ARN and BRU etc and feed into longhaul megahubs at FRA and CDG
They will look like the giant american carriers where evrywhere is only 2 (or more) hops away. Once you start having to change plane en route you may as well just fly BA thru LHR ir IB thru MAD. The playing field levels once more
Because lets be clear there is very little profit in any legacy's shorthaul programme, its all about feed, eliminating some competition.
Sure as eggs are eggs LH or AF will NOT be investing in a major expansion of whatever AZ operations they may acquire!!
BA would ideally get closer to AA and then possibly CX
At some point the EU hopes to agree more open skies deals with more territories.
As and when that happens, BA could just base a few longhaul frames at certain european airports and tray its luck at competing
Openskies is an exciting opportunity - I remain to be convinced about it lets be clear, but its a low risk approach to expanding influence across europe and deepening the strength of the BA brand in the USA. It may fail, who knows, but its a raw approach that relys on nothing but its own brand and reputation to live or die by, not buying soemone elses
So they are doing plenty I would say and certainly have an idea where they want to be.
AIRMALTA, as you so often say, its not that BA keep being rejected or losing out, they just havent been getting involved, period. A quite deliberate policy I would imagine!
Aisak From Spain, joined Aug 2005, 774 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4970 times:
It's impressive how people choose not to take into account several movements. Growth doesn't equal to purchase.
BA said some time ago that UK based franchisees were no longer useful. For the franchisees it was expensive to retain the BA product and the franchisee fee didn't provide BA with money and/or passengers. I'm talking about
- BA Connect which was 100% owned by BA and was posting losses. Almost the entire operation was sold to FlyBE while BA holds 15% of FlyBE which IS posting profits.
- GB Airways was put on sale and BA decided not to buy it. Instead BA decided to do the profitable routes by themselves. So BA keeps the brand on key GB Airways markets, keeps the money and the passengers still see the BA product.
- BMED was sold to BMI but BA got the slots and still keeps the passengers though a codeshare, feeding BA's longhaul network out of LHR.
- They have recently added 2 RJ85 and 2 BAes for their LCY operation: CityFlyer: 100% owned by BA
- It seems they have plans to set a new franchisee in India, and it also seems they want to expand their SouthAfrica flying through Comair, extending their brand there.
- BA has created Openskies to operate between NYC and several European cities. The 757-200 used for this growth are being replaced by new aircrafts so it's in fact growth.
- They have recently purchased L'avion.
- They have announced plans to be part of a holding owning both BA and IB.
-They have submitted an application for permission to share costs/revenues with AA.
And yet, some people say BA is standing still. They don't need to buy an airline with a bunch of planes to grow. Should BA-IB want in Central Europe, there's nothing preventing them to based 5 A320 in VIE to do flights to PAR, ROM, MIL, FRA and OTP called "Eastern Europe Airways". They could even fly VIE-JFK VIE-ORD or VIE-MIA as open skies allows it.
Why would they want to pay for OS and end all the FF and lounge agreements, codeshare agreements, change the signage, move terminals, make OS exit Star and get it into Oneworld.
I don't get why BA has to buy something to completely change it in less than a year's time.
PEET7G From Hungary, joined Jan 2007, 696 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4657 times:
Quoting AIR MALTA (Thread starter): BA and OW are now really weak in central Europe and it might now difficult to compete with *A and SkyTeam.
I really do not see the point of your dramatization... OW is perfectly covered with AY and MA in central/eastern Europe. Just because OW is not an alliance gobbling up every rubbish getting in their way, does not mean it is by any way weaker than others. With MA in OW the alliance has one of the highest standard and reputable airline matching OW standards and perfectly covering this central/eastern market. And now with the new BUD airport under construction MA will also have, what I always felt their weak point...an efficient and modern and really nice hub.
...the only thing that could go wrong is the new owners of MA destroying the standards. As a matter of fact I still dream of BA making a move for MA... it would definitely be a more logical and more potential addition than OS...
Konrad From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 552 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 4498 times:
Quoting PEET7G (Reply 21): OW is perfectly covered with AY and MA in central/eastern Europe.
I agree with that. Also, central/eastern Europe isn't exactly a high yield market which BA (or OW) should be after.
Speaking of MA I wish them luck with their newly acquired DH4s, they should work out much better for shorter routes out of BUD. Sadly, MA cancelled a few local destinations after getting rid of the CRJs (or maybe because flying there with CRJs didn't make sense).
Oneworld77 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2008, 238 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4328 times:
I have to say it amazes me too everytime one of AF/KL and LH twitch, BA are expected to do likewise.
They've been there and done that, long ago. Learnt the lessons and bagged the profits (if any). Lufty and Franco-Dutch junket have to travel that road yet themselves. 10-20 years time they'll be selling off what they've gobbled up.
Star goes to quantity and certainly not quality. OW is quite the opposite and add to the mix profitability and stability.
BA has a quality cachet that is not present with LH and AF/KL. I've been in the position to fly these and LX quite a bit recently and they just don't match the standard of BA. (I'm not british btw, just resident here).
If they felt inclined, there is always EI, FI, JU, CY, KM. They'd be daft to, but there are plenty of options!!
= Looking at their recent half-hearted OS bid, one would definitely extrapolate the same.
Quoting PEET7G (Reply 21): ..the only thing that could go wrong is the new owners of MA destroying the standards.
= Stop with this (every thread), Russians destroying MA crap. MA is a niche carrier and is rightsizing to make business sense. There is no reason for MA to send their gas guzzling 762's to continue prestige routes.
Quoting PEET7G (Reply 21): OW is perfectly covered with AY and MA in central/eastern Europe. Just because OW is not an alliance gobbling up every rubbish getting in their way, does not mean it is by any way weaker than others. With MA in OW the alliance has one of the highest standard and reputable airline matching OW standards and perfectly covering this central/eastern market.
= The problem is strategy. BUD is a relatively weak hub. A passenger flying from say the U.S. to East/Central Europe has to double connect (LHR AND BUD) to make their destination in the East/Central Europe. Without ANY presence between LHR and AMM, BA/OW loses connecting revenue between high yielding north American traffic going to East/Central Europe. They could expand at home base ... but LHR remains continually oversubscribed. BA not making a serious play for OS is short-sighted - as it means to fly OW, one has to double connect to most of these "so called" lucrative markets and regions.
Live, and let live.
: = This whole analysis of OW being quality is absolute rubbish ... it has airlines such as AA, IB, MA, and RJ ... none of which are the benchmarks of
: I completely agree. Having flown 4 different OW carriers, I found that the quality and professionalism varied quite substantially between one carrier
27 AIR MALTA
: I am working for a company with a large presence in Austria, Germany, Holland, Belgium, Italy and Switzerland (and also Finland). The number of busin
: Well they arent so dominant just yet, the ink isnt dry on SN, and AZ and SAS havent happened yet!! But again lets get real, BA flies double daily on
: = This is simply not true. Saludos, A.
: I agree. Start your own hubs in central Europe if need be. Interesting how the EU is beginning to look more like the US. I really believe that LH wil
: I think another thing to bear in mind is that not all high yield traffic comes from the US ( indeed with the State of the US economy and the value of
: Great idea... BA already tried that with DeutscheBA and it did not work. in fact the never made any profit with it. It's much more difficult to start
: I am not going to stop...simply, because I fly them on a weekly bases and can simply see the way they are heading On-time performance was simply one
: I would put RJ over many airlines instantly. A very, very high quality service if you ask me, ok I hate IB, but it could be only because of my bad ex
: Excellent reflection - I never understood the passivness of BA anyhow - all they understood was LHR -the rest was either of no importance or just lip
: I think personal preferences don't get us anywhere on that Star Alliance vs oneworld quality topic, so I tried a more objective approach on this: Base
: = While not all high yielding passengers come from the U.S., it still is the number 1 region for volume of high-yield passengers. It just simply cann
: - point any other economy any close to US, even in its today's "State". - wow! Your signature fits your post perfectly ...
: BA seem to have made their future priorities quite clear; IB, followed by AA, and now the financial press in the UK is reporting that they are looking