castroprauxel From Germany, joined Sep 2008, 467 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 23048 times:
Surprising but true: Israel's leading newspaper publishes today that LY is working on founding a 4th global airline alliance to compete with Star, OneWorld and Skyteam. The new alliance will be called "We", and the final agreement is to be signed within the next 90 days.
Apparently, after unsuccesful attempts to get into one of the exiting alliances, LY decided to found a new airline alliance comprising of medium and small sized airlines that otherwise would probably not find themselves in an alliance. The newspaper reports that LY has already signed a memorandum of understanding with VV, U8 and UT, and plan to incorporate some 20 airlines in the alliance within a year, including european and south american airlines, with which LY is currently negotiating.
The article was confirmed by LY and the Israeli ministry of transportation (unfortunately, a link in the english language is yet to be found).
UAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 23029 times:
Very interesting, but who is going to join them, there is not a lot by way of quality airlines out there now that are not already tied into an alliance. For that reasdon I see this being a very restricted alliance in terms of its depth and breadth of what it will offer the consumer.
EL AL don't even codeshare with any of those airlines at the moment. Additionally, so far it seems like a very limited regional alliance. Russia, Armeina, Ukraine and Israel- there's not much geographic separation- though they may fill a nice niche that the other alliances don't fill.
castroprauxel From Germany, joined Sep 2008, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 22587 times:
No reason it won't work. It will surely not be a meaningful competition to the larger alliances, but it will give those smaller airlines some more substance and visibility. In my view, in 10 years from now an airline that will not be in an alliance will have a really rough time to keep going. The future of civil aviation is in airline alliances.
YULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2215 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 21882 times:
Quoting UAL777UK (Reply 1): there is not a lot by way of quality airlines out there now that are not already tied into an alliance.
VS, although it is partly owned by SQ (which somewhat naturally ties them to *A), is a good airline that is in no alliance. FI is another good independent airline as well. And we know that belonging to an alliance is not something set in stone, ailines have left alliances for others before, MX and CO did it for instance, so in theory any airline may join one day, if they think that LY's new alliance is better for them than their current one.
I can see US joining, whose role in *A in NAm will become uncomfortable once the UA-CO merger is finalized. Their 'quality' may be questioned by some, but at least there is room for improvement! And I'm correct saying they already fly to TLV, right?
Of course most Middle Eastern carriers are independent, but obviously they won't go together with LY.
In fact, this could one main reason why LY is in no alliance. Existing alliances have much more to win by gaining one of the big Middle Eastern carriers than gaining LY, and then having LY might be a no-go for some Middle-Eastern airlines to join. Similar to why many intl carriers stopped flying to TPE so that they could gain access to the Chinese market. In fact, speaking of Taiwan, there are some non-allied airlines there too...
Yep, no doubt cleaning up diplomatic relationships comes first, then only later good productive business can come up. They'd better work on that before focusing on LY too much.
mysterzip From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 180 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 19484 times:
I don't think it's going to happen, quite honestly. It does have Wings written all over it. It's a nice idea, but maybe El Al should take a page out of Alaska's book. You don't have to part of an alliance to be a good, respectable airline that pleases its customers and shareholders.
yellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6525 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 19103 times:
Quoting mysterzip (Reply 27): I don't think it's going to happen, quite honestly. It does have Wings written all over it. It's a nice idea, but maybe El Al should take a page out of Alaska's book. You don't have to part of an alliance to be a good, respectable airline that pleases its customers and shareholders.
But you do have to be a codeshare slut!
When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
Airxliban From Lebanon, joined Oct 2003, 4521 posts, RR: 53
Reply 22, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 18375 times:
I can see El Al increasing the extent to which it cooperates with other airlines, but I can't see them possibly starting an alliance that could compete with the 3 majors. El Al is in a bit of a hard position, it can really only specialise in carrying people to and from Israel. It can offer almost no regional connectivity to any of its partner airlines nor is it particularly world class in any operational measures (except security) that would provide cost saving/revenue enhancing benefits to other airlines.
On top of that, 75% of the market is already snapped up by other alliances. Of the 25% that isn't, most of the airlines don't want to join alliances.
On top of that, I think El Al doesn't even operate on the Sabbath, which makes it less likely that you could consolidate a lot of back office functions for the partners in Israel given its lower cost environment.
On top of that, El Al isn't exactly known for its incredible product...so this alliance would probably compete on price (or security...that could potentially be an angle)
On top of that, El Al as an entity owned by the government of Israel is going to have a hard time shaking off the fact that many people see it as an instrument of the state. Given the choice between flying on LY and another airline, many people would pay more to fly on another airline purely on the basis that they do not want to contribute financially to the state of Israel - this is relevant for connecting traffic.
Without beating the dead horse, El Al could certainly code share more and increase cooperation with other airlines, that is a great idea and I hope it works for them. But I highly doubt anything that resembles a major world airline alliance is going to emerge out of this.
willd From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2008, 258 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 18072 times:
Wondered how far I could get in this thread before VS cropped up.
VS is 49% owned by SQ and as far as we know (read nothing to the contray has been writen) SQ could very well have a clause in the original agreement stating that VS will not join any alliance other than Star. May seem a strange clause but then again SQ was quite forceful in the using of the Virgin Brand...hence V Australia, Pacific Blue etc.
rangercarp From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 18028 times:
For quite some time I have felt there was room for a 4th alliance, though I expected SRB and the Virgins to be behind it. With the announcements last week of greater partnerships between the Virgin airlines, they may be heading in that direction. If El Al could get the Virgin group on board it would add a lot of credibility to their endeavor.
: My vote would be to name it TWA... Third World Alliance
: I would think the inverse would be quite the coup. Let businesses show they can cooperate, even if governments refuse to! (Yes, I do know that many o
: Ok, I read most of the posts, but I really fail to see what this new alliance would accomplish that the other 3 cannot - that 's for both the member c
: Oh gosh. I'm sorry, but I really can't see that working out. There are just soooooooooo many thinks that should tell one that this won't be a succeful
: I have rarely read something as weird as this kind of desperate alliance...... And indeed, as someone has already mentioned, it shows some troubling s
: How would all of the Islamic countries react to an alliance led by or created by LY or to one simply with LY as a member? When I was travelling regula
: Very interesting indeed. I have read the threads and comments and have to agree with many of them. We need to remember that El Al always had three dis