WROORD From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 886 posts, RR: 0 Posted (3 years 2 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2284 times:
I wonder why United Continental which formed United Continental Holding Co. does not maintain separate brands like AF and KLM? It is one holding company but continues operating as two brands. I know that there are national interests at stake and probably otherwise the governments would not agree to a merger. With UA and CO operating as two brand entities would probably retain more customers. Another one is SW and FL with FL having business class it would allow SW to serve more premium business markets and leave SW brand to leisure destinations.
MNMncrcnwjr From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 308 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (3 years 2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2006 times:
There are plenty of reasons for Multiple Brands by one company in the same industry
- Ford Motors : Ford - Lincoln
- Government Motors - Chevy- Cadillac - GMC - Buick
- Mercury Marine : Mercury, Force, Mariner
It is to take smaller slices of the overall pie rather than one large slice which is harder to manage ..
mogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (3 years 2 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1964 times:
A multiple brand is only meaningful if it offer product differentiation - hence the reason why so many minor brands within GM/Ford/Chrysler were dying - they're all offering the same car under a different logo, which does nothing except confusing the consumer and increase structural costs (dealerships)
Cathay and Dragonair makes sense to remain separate brands cuz clearly the service level is different - one is a renowned global carrier with true First class, another is a regional carrier, mostly for tourists, to somewhat second-tier destinations (except their Shanghai shuttle)
UA/CO makes no sense to remain 2 brands since they're offering similar products.
AF/KL is constrained purely by national pride. It'll totally suck for the only airline based in Amsterdam to be called "AirFrance"
MNMncrcnwjr From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 308 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (3 years 2 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1897 times:
Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 5): A multiple brand is only meaningful if it offer product differentiation
Absolutely! If there is no product differentiation then there is no real reason .. But so far there really isn't that much airlines can differentiate from one another because they really only offer the savings of TIME. Transportation to a distant place that if accessible via other modes will usually require added time to do so. So the main reason to Fly becomes a Dollar value for time equation.
Now with that said ... They can differentiate on performance, customer relations, inflight features, or just straight budget fares with a pay for added features. Now if one could optimize the basic equation with the added variables (which there are many more) they would probably lock the market .....
The added synergies could be handled with multiple brands. As the holding company can cross train and deploy employees, bulk purchase fuel contacts, similar fleets, consolidate underwing services, one IT system etc. Synergy savings are not limited just due to multiple brands.
WROORD From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 886 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (3 years 2 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1819 times:
Many pax would not necessary put an equal sign between UA and CO not to mention Southwest and Air Tran. It is one thing to merge when the company that is being overtaken is failing, but there is really not reason for the two mergers here besides elimination of some competition. I have flown with CO only a handful of times, but they are always in top tier for business travel while UA we all know where Mr. Tilton pushed UA towards the bottom of almost all rankings. So would it make more sense to keep CO brand as more premium business. Same for FL and WN, sort of like Lexus and Toyota. They could have one board of directors, and common HR, payroll and other back office and maintnance operations still saving a lot of money, but possible making more on two brands.