Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SkyTeam - Why The Stepchild Of Alliances?  
User currently offlineDeltaDawg From United States of America, joined May 2006, 776 posts, RR: 1
Posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 13363 times:

With TAM seemingly ready to join StarAlliance soon it seems that SkyTeam is once again bypassed for another alliance. Seems Sky never can land additional big carriers or strategic carriers such as those in S. America and SE Asia. CO leaving Sky for Star was a slap in the face of Sky and just seems that they always struggle to bring members in. Anyone with ideas as to why so few carriers have chosen Sky or ideas of what could be done to attract more? Or, does anyone know of any carriers looking to join SkyTeam?


GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
64 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCatIII From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 3029 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 13345 times:

Quoting DeltaDawg (Thread starter):
CO leaving Sky for Star was a slap in the face of Sky and just seems that they always struggle to bring members in.

Why was it a slap in the face? DL merged with NW, and was also pursuing AS to join. Why would they stay?

Quoting DeltaDawg (Thread starter):
Anyone with ideas as to why so few carriers have chosen Sky or ideas of what could be done to attract more?

Might have something to do with the fact that it was the last alliance formed, and that the DL brand isn't as well known as say AA or United. Might also have to do with DL being so big, having the jv with KL and AF, and potential alliance carriers feeling like they're the odd man out in such an alliance.

Quoting DeltaDawg (Thread starter):
Or, does anyone know of any carriers looking to join SkyTeam?

Yeah, JAL in about 3 years.  


User currently offlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10351 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 13221 times:

Quoting DeltaDawg (Thread starter):
CO leaving Sky for Star was a slap in the face of Sky and just seems that they always struggle to bring members in.

Not really. DL and NW would have known that CO would leave once the merger was complete. CO was always a reluctant member of Skyteam, anyway.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlineLJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4402 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 13183 times:

Quoting DeltaDawg (Thread starter):
Anyone with ideas as to why so few carriers have chosen Sky or ideas of what could be done to attract more? Or, does anyone know of any carriers looking to join SkyTeam?

With VN this year and probably GA next year SE Asia will be covered nicely (though MH would be a good addition). Latin America is problematic due to the limited options available.

Oh yes, RO will also join this year. Not a big name like Kingfisher, but not a bad one. If Skyteam and MEA can finally agree to something we will see MEA also coming to Skyteam, but then again you never know. Uzbekistan is also listed as future member on Wiki (not always 100% reliable), but I haven't heard anything regarding Uzbekistan (has anyone more info on this?)


User currently offlineAlias1024 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2747 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 13178 times:

I guess I disagree somewhat with the premise that SkyTeam is the stepchild of alliances. They both have 11 member carriers according to their websites. Each has areas where they are stronger and areas where they are weaker.


It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems with just potatoes.
User currently offlineNWA330nut From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 115 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 12932 times:

If anything I'd say that OW is doing worse when it comes to how the businesses are actually doing, but I can see what you mean by there being major holes in Skyteam's network.

User currently offlineDELTA7478 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 173 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 12772 times:

I just think that Sky Team needs to wake up and really porsue other airlines, I know that we are getting Vietnam AIrlines and thats great, but in my 10 years with DELTA I have never checkt anybody going there. We need to get China Eastern or China Airlines and if they dont want to going then go for EVA. Again in India; Air india is going with Star and Kingfisher just anounce last week that they are joining ONE World, so lets get in bed with Jet Airways. here are more potential members

1. Olimpic Airways
2. Avianca in colombia
3. V Australia
4. Virgin Atlantic
5. Alaska Airlines

[Edited 2010-03-05 10:44:14]

User currently offlinepeanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1438 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 12642 times:

As a person keenly interested in the major alliances of the world, I think your perception is far from reality. SkyTeam stepchild? Far from it.
What we are seeing is a few major adjustments. NW and KL were very close. KL and DL, before the NW/DL merger, had not much in common. KL and DL are now "forced" to get acquainted with each other and are doing it pretty eloquently. It takes time though, from many different perspectives, including system integrations.

AF/KL/DL are practically seamless and one carrier across the Atlantic. SkyTeam "invented" true airline cooperation. StarAlliance is catching up big time, and will or have surpass(ed) ST in different markets.
OW just had a reality check on what could happen (JAL saga) and is experiencing momentum as a result.

Remember one thing: SkyTeam will never try to emulate StarAlliance in trying to get as many members as they can. If it doesn't make sense, if the carriers become half-ass members, it won't happen (look at SQ in Star, it's kind of silly).

BTW, China Southern is a huge, important carrier in China. Just because you don't hear them much in ATL doesn't mean they aren't important for ST.

GA and VN are in emerging world markets. Very key I would say.

Not sure where this SkyTeam feeling of "insecurity" from some a.netters comes from, really. It's not a contest of quantity. It's a contest of synergies and scope. I think ST does very well. However, South America needs to be addressed.



Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
User currently offlineBrianDromey From Ireland, joined Dec 2006, 3916 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 12540 times:

Quoting DELTA7478 (Reply 6):
1. Olimpic Airways

Going to STAR as part of the merger with Aegean.



Next flights: MAN-ORK-LHR(EI)-MAN(BD); MAN-LHR(BD)-ORK (EI); DUB-ZRH-LAX (LX) LAX-YYZ (AC) YYZ-YHZ-LHR(AC)-DUB(BD)
User currently offlineanonms From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 617 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 12486 times:

Quoting DELTA7478 (Reply 6):
I just think that Sky Team needs to wake up and really porsue other airlines, I know that we are getting Vietnam AIrlines and thats great, but in my 10 years with DELTA I have never checkt anybody going there. We need to get China Eastern or China Airlines and if they dont want to going then go for EVA. Again in India; Air india is going with Star and Kingfisher just anounce last week that they are joining ONE World, so lets get in bed with Jet Airways. here are more potential members

1. Olimpic Airways
2. Avianca in colombia
3. V Australia
4. Virgin Atlantic
5. Alaska Airlines

CI is reasonably cozy DL, VN, AZ, OK, KE, CZ, and GA; they've already said they're interested, it just depends on if SkyTeam is interested. That said, BR is cozy with AA, so I don't see why SkyTeam would pursue BR.

I don't think would join SkyTeam just on the basis of their ownership structure; DJ/VA are far more likely. I don't think AS wants to be in any alliance, either, from what people have been sayind.



This is my signature.
User currently offlineseemyseems From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2009, 967 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 12422 times:

Quoting DELTA7478 (Reply 6):
4. Virgin Atlantic

I doubt it, VS has strong ties with several Star carriers and is 49% owned by Singapore Airlines.



seemyseems
User currently offlineByrdluvs747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2351 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 12402 times:

It depends on what you mean by stepchild. If you're talking about size or number of members, then Skyteam is close to OW.

The "Leftover Alliance" label stems from the fact that there's nothing exciting about Skyteam. If it wasn't for AF, the alliance would be completely boring. DL, SU, OK, KE? Yawwwn.   

Quoting DELTA7478 (Reply 6):

4. Virgin Atlantic
5. Alaska Airlines

Here we go again with the AS & VS in Skyteam nonsense. As mentioned in other recent threads, AA and AS will be deepening their partnership to the same degree as DL/AS later this year. VS won't be joinging Skyteam as long as SQ holds 49% of the airline.



The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
User currently onlinekiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8544 posts, RR: 13
Reply 12, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 12315 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DELTA7478 (Reply 6):
1. Olimpic Airways

If by this you meant Olympic Air , they have decided to merge with A3 , and it has already been stated that if the merger goes ahead the combined carrier will be in *A . If , for whatever reason , the EU competition authorities reject the merger then maybe Skyteam and Olympic Air would be a possibility .

Quoting DELTA7478 (Reply 6):
4. Virgin Atlantic

A carrier 49% owned by a major *A player and with either codeshare or frequent flyer connections to *A members CA NH BD CO SQ NZ US SK , while having absolutely no codeshare/mileage connection to any current Skyteam carrier seems to me a less than likely proposition for Skyteam membership .

Quoting DELTA7478 (Reply 6):
3. V Australia

The V Australia/Virgin Blue combo on the other hand has distinct possibilities for Skyteam - they will not necessarily do whatever VS does , in fact of late the two organisations seem somewhat estranged and there are rumours that they will ditch the Virgin branding in favour of unified brand .



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlineDeltaDawg From United States of America, joined May 2006, 776 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 12263 times:

Quoting peanuts (Reply 7):
BTW, China Southern is a huge, important carrier in China. Just because you don't hear them much in ATL doesn't mean they aren't important for ST.

Not doubting the importance of CZ to the Chinese market or SkyTeam, in fact the last time I was in China with my company i flew from PVG-CAN and the treatment from CZ was fantastic. Several times the gate attendant asked about DL and ATL and was very complimentary of DL.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 7):
Not sure where this SkyTeam feeling of "insecurity" from some a.netters comes from, really. It's not a contest of quantity. It's a contest of synergies and scope. I think ST does very well. However, South America needs to be addressed.

You may be correct in some having a feeling of insecurity about SkyTeam and indeed it may be unjustified but as most here mention the high quality and seamlessness of business between the members of SkyTeam why then would more carriers not want to be a part of that? Don't get me wrong, I have traveled abroad enough to experience the seamless workings between most of the members, most notably DL & AF,UX, AM & KE. However, SkyTeam can never seem to fill in the gaps with carriers such as South America and SE Asia. We always hear rumors of AV, MH and others but nothing ever seems to happen.



GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
User currently offlinemandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6767 posts, RR: 76
Reply 14, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 12087 times:

Quoting CatIII (Reply 1):
Might also have to do with DL being so big, having the jv with KL and AF, and potential alliance carriers feeling like they're the odd man out in such an alliance.

DL and CO aren't exactly good friends. CO and NW have been in good terms (at least until 2001), and KL/NW history of cooperation then alliance was good for CO. DL and AF has been in bed with each other for years. When DL and NW merged, this leaves CO in a not so ideal position within SkyTeam... AF/KL had happened, so CO's not so good friend called DL, now controls the old friend NW, and can suck up the old friend's friend, KL, through DL's bed partner, AF. CO's US-Asia (not via GUM) isn't exactly historic either... and that was NW's turf... and is now DL's turf through the merger. It was time to leave Skyteam. Why go to Star and United instead of OW? Well, AA's in OW... it would be the typical Texan business bloodbath... just like Dallas vs Houston   

Quoting LJ (Reply 3):
With VN this year and probably GA next year SE Asia will be covered nicely (though MH would be a good addition). Latin America is problematic due to the limited options available.

MH's entry were supported by CO and KL... but AF saw MH's entry as a major threat to AF's Asian network. AF already share its Asian network with KL (and MH is close to KL), but has lucrative interline agreements with SQ and QF to carry AF's pax around Asia and Australia. MH's entry, would mean a first preference to put AF's passengers on MH instead of SQ and QF... which would mean new negotiations on the interlines etc etc etc. So, AF opposed MH's entry.

VN's entry to Skyteam is probably sponsored by AF, GA's entry is sponsored by KE... KL's position on this in unclear but is said to be neutral (it preferred MH, but historically, it has worked with GA many times in the past)... and KL was a big supporter in the original MH/GA cooperation (which was aimed to squeeze SQ in the Malaysia-Indonesia market, and Malaysia/Indonesia - Europe market... which SQ have significant chunks in them) as the European connector for both carriers... this was in 2000, and signed in 2002/3. So, MH and GA has been directed towards Skyteam by then.

Whilst Star is having the "grab as many members" and then let the members sort the agreements amongst themselves, it has resulted in questions as to why have SQ and Thai together (as they do nothing but try to kill each other in the Europe-SE Asia and Australia markets), and SQ and AirNZ... as over than 10 years ago in the early days of alliances, were squabbling with each other over Ansett those many years ago with SQ ending up having a 1/4 of AirNZ in order to influence it's attempted acquisition of AN (50% owned by AirNZ, the other 50% was what SQ wanted, or more)... in the end, AirNZ used the money from SQ's 25% purchase to buy the remainder of AN, and peeved SQ off... with AirNZ loosing cash (even before the purchase of the remaining 50% of AN), in the end SQ agreed to help... but AirNZ went to the govt to reject SQ's bid for another 25% of AirNZ... When it became apparent NZ was going to go bust due to loosing its cash and needed chronic help, NZ went to the government and said, "aaah, we actually need cash", SQ dumped all intentions to buy anything else in NZ (I think they even dumped their 25%) and ran... and refused to touch AN when it was proposed by NZ... and NZ went bust, but was aided, and became what it is today. If dictators are airlines, then Star Alliance is like seeing Stalin and Hitler out on a karaoke together.

OW, has always been the "alliance of the old"... BA/QF, AA, AY, and later JL, and also RJ...(funny, BA/QF/RJ/JL... something to do with monarchies?    )... lost Aer Lingus... and since Skyteam went beyond it's original 5 (AF, AeroMex, DL, KE, KL), OW has been relatively quiet. It is seeking a much different strategy to Sky and Star... they claim in focusing on value of the alliance to its FF members... and appear to be focused on long haul alliance benefits.

Just my 2 cents...

Mandala499



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently offlineByrdluvs747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2351 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 11919 times:

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 17):
)... lost Aer Lingus

You also forgot how *A lost MX to OW.

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 17):
It is seeking a much different strategy to Sky and Star... they claim in focusing on value of the alliance to its FF members

Well that may be the old methodology, but I believe OW has taken the gloves off and is now ready to go dance with *A.



The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
User currently offlinemandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6767 posts, RR: 76
Reply 16, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 11873 times:

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 18):
You also forgot how *A lost MX to OW.

That one I didn't know about !   Thanks!

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 18):
Well that may be the old methodology, but I believe OW has taken the gloves off and is now ready to go dance with *A.

Well, won't be a surprise if it happened. I believe these two alliances are very different that if they decide to go to the prom together, Skyteam would need to check if they've missed out on anything alliance wise!



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
User currently onlinekiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8544 posts, RR: 13
Reply 17, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 11860 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 18):
You also forgot how *A lost MX to OW.

With a more than 5 year gap between MX leaving *A and joining OW I dont think that I would characterise it as "*A lost MX to OW" , more "*A lost MX which later went to OW " . Quite different from the case with CO where they left Skyteam and 3 days later entered *A having made it clear throughout most of the "divorce" process that they would be going to *A

It may seem a subtle distinction but to me it's a bit like saying "My wife left me for another guy" if she divorced me in 2004 and married "the other guy" in 2009 .



Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6449 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 11664 times:

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 12):
The "Leftover Alliance" label stems from the fact that there's nothing exciting about Skyteam. If it wasn't for AF, the alliance would be completely boring. DL, SU, OK, KE? Yawwwn.

Please explain the "nothing exciting about Skyteam" and "if it wasn't for AF the alliance would be boring". How does an airline or an alliance get to be boring? I really don't understand that remark. Who are the exciting airlines or alliances and why?


User currently offlineEnviroTO From Canada, joined Aug 2004, 825 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11590 times:

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 20):
With a more than 5 year gap between MX leaving *A and joining OW I dont think that I would characterise it as "*A lost MX to OW" , more "*A lost MX which later went to OW " .

It was in the cards from early on though. MX had ties with UA so it joined *A. Something happened between MX and UA and they partnered with AA. MX left *A, deepened its ties with AA, after a 18 month period of preparation joined OW.

*A lost MX to AA.


User currently offlineLondonCity From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2008, 1461 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11478 times:

One major drawback for Skyteam in the UK market is its poor coverage of Australasia. Many Brits and Antipodeans travel between these three countries (UK/Oz/NZ) using Oneworld and Star RTW tickets rather than Skyteam

Skyteam members can offer no domestic flights in Oz/NZ. And whereas you can now reach Australia via the Pacific with DL's recently introduced service from the US it is impossible to fly to/from Europe with Skyteam members using the kangaroo route via SE Asia.

Travellers must either fly Europe-Oz/NZ via mainland China or S Korea. But travellers prefer to travel via (and make stopovers in) the likes of BKK, HKG, KUL or SIN.

For that reason, as noted in a previous post, MH would be a most welcome addition to Skyteam.


User currently offlinelxmd11 From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 149 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11247 times:

I thinks its really ironic and funny that when i loaded this page there was a mexicana oneworld advertisement.



User currently offlineCarlisle From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 271 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11531 times:

One of the best thoughts and dreams I ever had was KL gaining enough revenue/independance to tell DL/AF to go take it where the sun doesn't shine, leave SkyTeam and come on over to STAR with LH, UA, CO, etc,

Never in a million years, I know...

Jeremy Carlisle



"CLEAN PLANES AND DIRTY MARTINIS" (Delta)
User currently offlineairzim From Zimbabwe, joined Jun 2001, 1199 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11557 times:

Tarom
Garuda
Vietnam Airlines
China Airlines
Malaysia
Aeroflot
China Southern

Now that's an impressive list of carriers......

  


User currently offlinemandala499 From Indonesia, joined Aug 2001, 6767 posts, RR: 76
Reply 24, posted (4 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 11486 times:

Quoting LondonCity (Reply 23):
Skyteam members can offer no domestic flights in Oz/NZ. And whereas you can now reach Australia via the Pacific with DL's recently introduced service from the US it is impossible to fly to/from Europe with Skyteam members using the kangaroo route via SE Asia.

Travellers must either fly Europe-Oz/NZ via mainland China or S Korea. But travellers prefer to travel via (and make stopovers in) the likes of BKK, HKG, KUL or SIN.

That's why I wrote:

Quoting mandala499 (Reply 17):
AF already share its Asian network with KL (and MH is close to KL), but has lucrative interline agreements with SQ and QF to carry AF's pax around Asia and Australia. MH's entry, would mean a first preference to put AF's passengers on MH instead of SQ and QF... which would mean new negotiations on the interlines etc etc etc. So, AF opposed MH's entry.

Book yourself on a KL ticket, and you'll get on the KUL-Aussie segment on MH using a KL codeshare flight number.
Book yourself on an AF ticket, and you'll get the SIN-Aussie segment on QF/SQ... but, am not sure on the codesharing...
So, get yourself on a skyteam member FF, you go and grab the Europe-Aussie on a KLM ticket and you're sorted!
Not sure if you can grab the miles on QF/SQ though... *it's been a looong time since I checked these things*

FF miles are a liability... lucrative interlines still make money... hence, that's why AF did what it did to MH's proposed entry.

Mandala499



When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
25 LondonCity : Thanks for pointing out the fact that Skyteam members code-share with rivals between SE Asia and Downunder. Strangely enough, I checked with klm.com
26 Post contains images OA412 : Not it wasn't. CO was an unwilling participant in Skyteam who was brought in due to its partnership with NW. It was common knowledge that they would
27 B6A322 : Slightly OT, but I wouldn't be surprised if sometime in the near future AB gets ready to join an alliance. I also wouldn't be surprised if it were Sky
28 CatIII : AirBerlin? Aren't they an LCC?
29 Rafabozzolla : Don't forget IB. Spain is a monarchy as well.
30 Post contains links and images Byrdluvs747 : I see AB as a better fit in OW. In Skyteam they would share the central europe role with AF. In OW they would have it to themselves. They are indeed
31 skyguyB727 : TAROM has been around for a long time. I think they are more well known than Kingfisher. When I see the airline code "IT", I still think of Air Inter
32 CatIII : Ask most Americans what they know about Tarom, and they probably wouldn't even know who that is.
33 B6A322 : True, but at the same time the AF presence in europe is primarily within...well France, and since AirBerlin's (not so) recent acquisitions, they real
34 DTWLAX : Wake up skyguy......there is a world outside America. Just because Americans are not aware of IT, it does not mean that the rest of the world does no
35 Post contains links Byrdluvs747 : Being ignorant of foreign countries as many are here, most americans wouldn't know anything about LAN, Emirates, Etihad, and many other airlines. If
36 airbear : Hi ... What a great line, mandala499 ! Bravo. Anyway, I thought I'd better fly the flag in this thread for Australiasia - a somewhat neglected part o
37 kiwiandrew : Probaby AOM ( Air Outre Mer ) , if I am not mistaken - they in turn disappeared into Air Liberte which eventually disappeared into .... nothing .
38 Post contains images airbear : Hi... thanks. That was them. We haven't had a lot of luck with French carriers here over the years... Air Austral comes in 2 days/wk - and I'd love t
39 gardermoen : Quoting airbear Anyway, I thought I'd better fly the flag in this thread for Australiasia - a somewhat neglected part of the world as far as ST goes.
40 ANstar : DJ/VS also have reciprocal lounge access.
41 yendig : Are you saying that SQ is a half-ass member of *A? What reasons do you have for that?
42 kiwiandrew : I could be wrong but I think he is referring to the commonly held view that SQ are rather half-hearted about alliance membership - reportedly not ver
43 yendig : They are a wonderful airline, for sure! I didn't realise they were so un-cooperative. Always struck me as daft that TG & SQ are in the same allia
44 Icarus75 : I think you're wrong. AF is codesharing with QF wih connections trough SIN & HKG and I think these two airlines are very happy with that. The pro
45 airbear : Hi... oops, my mistake - and I forgot about VN & GA, too. Hi, as well, but that's news to me since I've never come across anything like that in t
46 Post contains links FFLyerWorld : If you look on this page on the far right - you can find more information regarding this topic... http://www.velocityrewards.com.au/content/AboutUs/i
47 airzim : And another weak rebuttal from a gate agent. Facts are facts. Those airlines are a joke. I've flown them all. When you're recruiting the flag carrier
48 mayor : Kingfisher isn't even on your original list and aren't they joining *A or Oneworld?
49 LJ : Kingfisher will join Oneworld (didn't understand why airzim listed this airlne either).
50 Post contains images kgaiflyer : Doesn't Virgin-Atlantic codeshare with Continental? This might turn awkward
51 JAL : I get the impression that SkyTeam seem willing to accept just about anyone! I mean Uzbekistan Airlines? What value do they bring?
52 Post contains images cesarv777 : Doesn't Virgin-Atlantic codeshare with Continental?
53 seemyseems : I agree, TAS has good coverage from SkyTeam with SU, OK, CZ and KE all serving.
54 kgaiflyer : Very timely addition. Right now they take US people to the north side of Afghanistan. Btw, Uzbeks are one of the cultural groups *in* Afghanistan. He
55 OA412 : Gate agent? That's the best you can do? From previous posts, you seem to have a thing against gate agents. Did one of them deny you an upgrade once?
56 srbmod : It was definitely a "shotgun wedding". Having two SkyTeam carriers with hubs in the NYC market was a mixed bag. While there are destinations on CO ou
57 ANstar : With Premium Economy, lounges, frequent flyer programs, codesharing & interlining I don;t think you can really call them a LCC any more.
58 srbmod : That's actually becoming commonplace with LCCs in the US. In many respects, the lines between an LCC and a legacy carrier have blurred. AirTran is a
59 Post contains images peanuts : In general that's what I was going for, thank you. As I've mentioned in a different thread, I still consider SQ the dark horse in StarAlliance. Time
60 B6A322 : Didn't US buy out America West?
61 mayor : Nope.....America West bought out US, but they kept the US name, logos, etc.
62 DTWLAX : And the very next year, they tried to buy DL and failed miserably.
63 Flashmeister : I find it funny that SkyTeam is somehow the "stepchild" of alliances, when in fact:Its members include the largest and second-largest airlines/holding
64 mayor : And they, if successful, wanted to keep the DL name, logo, livery, etc.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why The End Of The AZ MXP Hub? posted Sat Apr 5 2008 18:28:16 by AFKLMLHLX
Why The Absence Of Nordic Carriers At LAX posted Mon Nov 12 2007 17:59:51 by Juventus
Why The Lack Of Fossett Coverage? posted Fri Sep 7 2007 08:19:02 by PiedmontINT
Why The Lack Of Interactive Moving Maps On US Domestic Service? posted Tue Aug 7 2007 01:31:38 by RUHFlyer
The Value Of Alliances posted Mon Mar 19 2007 10:41:17 by Qantas787
The Future Of Alliances (post Merger Frenzy) posted Fri Nov 17 2006 12:09:40 by B777A340Fan
767 With RR Engines - Why The Lack Of Orders? posted Mon Sep 25 2006 00:06:13 by 1337Delta764
WHY The Change Of CO 1636/1637 To Barbados posted Thu Jun 16 2005 20:55:05 by Aerofan
The Business Of Alliances posted Sun Apr 3 2005 01:23:04 by JetADude
Why The Absence Of BA At EMA? posted Fri Apr 1 2005 10:03:03 by DFWLandingPath