SYDSpotter From Australia, joined Oct 2012, 152 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1602 times:
Quoting leftyboarder (Reply 2): And another kick in the a** of alliances... A Star airline in bed with a Oneworld airline when there are obvious alliance partners to cooperate (namely QF and SQ/TG). The year of treason
Are there any competition issues with the proposed alliance (the NZ-HKG portion rather than the HKG-LHR bit) given NZ and CX are the two carriers flying direct between NZ-HKG.
I thought one of the reasons why a CX/QF partnership would never get off the ground was because any proposed extensive alliance would cause massive competition issues as they are the only two flying direct b/w OZ and HKG (with the exception of VS to SYD).
EK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4823 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1606 times:
Quoting SYDSpotter (Reply 3): I thought one of the reasons why a CX/QF partnership would never get off the ground was because any proposed extensive alliance would cause massive competition issues as they are the only two flying direct b/w OZ and HKG (with the exception of VS to SYD).
The relationship between the 2 is sour full stop...
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
ual777uk From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1607 times:
Quoting leftyboarder (Reply 2): A Star airline in bed with a Oneworld airline when there are obvious alliance partners to cooperate (namely QF and SQ/TG). The year of treason
Yes but SQ and TG are no good on the non stop from HKG to LHR. I suspect NZ was bleeding heavily on this route and this exit plan makes so much more commercial sense. I would love to know what NZ average LF was on the london route.
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 4): What happens to the LHR slot at 1145 which is the arrival of the ANZ flight via HKG ?
I would love to know the answer to that as well....SFO - LHR maybe?
It is an asset worth money. They have indicated in the article that they are dismissing 70 LHR based crews, that is a clear indication that they will not be using that slot.
Maybe CX purchased the slot from the as part of the deal so they can accelerate the 744 retirement on the route and have no drop in ASKs. Offer ANZ a guaranteed number of seats as well as access to the network out of HKG ?
Don't know, just guessing.....
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
ota1 From Germany, joined Apr 2008, 398 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1602 times:
There have been rumors popping up more or less frequently that CX is not happy with oneworld anymore.Other rumors were suggesting CX was looking to jump ship to Star Alliance.
Could this alliance be the first step of their withdrawal from oneworld?
sunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 4812 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1604 times:
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 11): The AKL to LHR via LAX is about 3 hours shorter then via Asia.
Many NZ'ers have are unjustifiably paranoid about transiting via LAX to LHR even though it is seamless. The HKG transit is more pleasant given that the HKG terminal is much more attractive and has designated space for transit. In LAX NZ's transit passengers are confined to a transit lounge.
mogandoCI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1603 times:
CX / HKG is unique from the rest of SE Asia is that it's (a) the southern most city that could profitably fly nonstop to North America and (b) closest to the great circle routing between SYD and LHR.
The only major partnerships CX has are JL and AA, which could easily be switched to NH and UA with minimal connectivity loss, if any. CX also code-share with LAN, but the daily hand-off is limited given the distances involved.
If Star manages to win CX over (however remote the possibility), that would be a major coup.
Amen to that. My xfr experiences in NRT were horrendous last week. Never again.
Quoting zeke (Reply 14): Do not know. Given the way QF is courting China Eastern, and Emirates, more likely I would think they leave oneworld, or maybe BA/TK and CX/CA will be part of Star.
The situation is all about game-changing strategies now. The QF+EK move has essentially spurred a "domino affect" among individual network carriers, which has resulted in major alliance re-think. It's no longer about the airline planning strategic moves within the context of their respective alliance membership; rather, it's all about maximizing whatever opportunities, as they present themselves, to better position the airline to compete in the global realm.
Most interestingly, all of these structural changes are revolving around the Middle East/GCC: Australia/Asia on one side, Europe on the other. BA+Qatar+OW, AB/EY+AF-KL, QF+EK. Now, we have the distinct possibility that LH+TK may tie-up.
Some of these decisions have definitely rocked the boats, but nothing has over-turned the ships quite yet. Personally, I think this is all too natural: these alliances have added so many partner carriers over the years and not accounted for conflicts with national pride and differences in cultural/operating strategies. There will inevitably be consequences from that, with individual carriers taking actions that put their best interests at heart, and not necessarily benefiting the greater good of the whole alliance and/or strategic partners. Without question, the largest shocks will start to occur IF a major network carrier chooses to switch/ditch an alliance upon seeing diminished value in membership.
HKG is not part of Southeast Asia, which is why it is unique. And yes, Star Alliance does desperately need more Chinese presence especially given ST's dominance of Southern/Eastern China and the likelihood of Hainan going to OneWorld which may erode CA's dominance up north.
Kaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 2922 posts, RR: 29
Reply 24, posted (1 year 8 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1608 times:
Quoting zeke (Reply 7): This will free up additional equipment for NZ, where will they deploy that capacity ?
Quoting zeke (Reply 12): It is an asset worth money. They have indicated in the article that they are dismissing 70 LHR based crews, that is a clear indication that they will not be using that slot.
NZ have been saying for some time that they will focus on the Pacific rim. ORD/IAH have been rumoured for the 789s due early in 2014 and S. America seems to be on the agenda (note that N.Z. is one of the leads for the Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade agreement).
On the other hand, LAX-LHR is NZ's most profitable international sector. If they keep the LHR slot, they might think about AKL-SFO-LHR.
Note à moi-même - il faut respecter les cons.
: I disagree. This year, the only carriers to embrace "unorthodox" tie-ups thus far are those for whom the existing global alliance frameworks carry li
: Economic factors are indeed the primary driving factor, but one cannot overlook some of the more subtle under linings which do indeed incur differenc