Captainsloo From Singapore, joined Dec 2011, 60 posts, RR: 0 Posted (3 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1890 times:
I'm new here and this is my first post. Please forgive me if I sound a little naive. After reading this article (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_world_business/view/1171980/1/.html), I was wondering if it may be better to have a consolidated European Airlines, perhaps two or three major European carriers compared to numerous different national carriers.
This idea stemmed from my understanding that in the States, there have been mergers of major airlines in the past few years. Additionally, since the EU is an economic and political union with their own currency, can it work with an airline as well? It might also help streamline organisation and reduce redundancy in routes to tackle competition from LCC.
I don't mean to reduce the entire variety of national carriers into one airline, but perhaps two or three European carriers. This will allow for competition and innovation even at the business and first level.
Just a random thought which compelled me to join as a a.netter.
BOStonsox From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 2005 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1822 times:
Welcome to a.net!
This seems to be slowly coming to fruition, as we have BA/IB, AF/KL, and LH/LX, and rumors of these three buying other airlines. These are merged companies but the airlines run separately from each other. I've heard rumors that TP may go to LH, AZ may go to AF, and that EI may go to BA. Of course, those are only rumors. But since each country has only one or two main hubs, there are things these extra hubs can offer that others can't. For example, on BA/IB you can get more US/Canada traffic with LHR than with MAD, but from Latin America MAD works better than LHR.
FlyCaledonian From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 2136 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (3 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 1661 times:
Quoting Eagleboy (Reply 3): While the EU may be a 'union' with a single currency, they are quite a way from full political and/or economic union.
Single market and single currency are different things. 27 countries are in the EU, but only 17 use the single currency (the Euro).
As has been said, the fact that many countries still have bilaterals with single EU countries means that for legal purposes the individual airlines have to remain, although many back office functions can be integrated in the owning groups. I think at some point one of the three groups (IAG, LH or AFKLM) will look at creating a single shorthaul carrier for European flights before we see an outright merger of say BA/IB or AF/KL into a single international airline.
First of all welcome to a.net. Is it Captainsloo or Captain Solo? If it's the latter pls. say hello to Chewbacca...
I often thought about this idea as well. If you compare the current situation with airlines such as Luxair (sorry to all a.netters from Luxembourg), Albania Airlines (sorry to all Albanian airlines) etc. with the USA it would be like each state having its own airline, e.g. Texas Air, Air Wisconsin, New York Air etc. Hmm, wait a moment, didn't these airlines really exist....?
The situation is smilar to everything else in the EU: the approach is just half-hearted and if we really want to become a union we have to take the next step*) - or leave it.
*) to all UK-A-netters: but whatever will happen - we will put our hand towels on the beach chairs first