VS11 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1014 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 12 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1335 times:
Sorry if this has been discussed but which American airline do you think will replace United in the Heathrow Four (The 2 American and 2 British carriers allowed to operate transatlantic service to LHR according to Bermuda II) if United does not manage to survive? Let's not forget that both United and American got their Bermuda II rights because the original designated carriers went bankrupt. Interestingly enough, we may have the same situation again....Methinks, it will be Delta but what do you think? And it will be great if you are familiar with the process of choosing carriers for that agreement to share with us.
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16555 posts, RR: 52 Reply 1, posted (10 years 12 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1326 times:
(IMO) If UAL goes under DL will take UAL's NRT hub and beyond rights and CO will take the LHR operation, but CO does not need or want all those LHR flights so I would assume there would be some serious lobbying to allow CO and DL to split UAL's LHR slots in exchange for letting BMI into the LHR-US market.
Making it three US and three British carriers operating US-LHR, Good compromise (IMO).
Also allowing the 6 carriers with Heathrow-US flights the right to fly from any US city without restriction to LHR, thus allowing DL to fly from ATL and CO to fly from IAH to LHR.
VS11 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1014 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (10 years 12 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1298 times:
I do not think that it will go that far to negotiate the whole BII treaty. It will not make sense to have a new treaty in place as the EU and US will have in the foreseeable future a blanket agreement to cover all air traffic issues.
If United goes under, it will be up to the US government to appoint a new carrier. I am not sure if the UK needs to approve the US government choice but the question in my opinion will be which US carrier will the US government pick, and why?
Kaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12166 posts, RR: 35 Reply 3, posted (10 years 12 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1274 times:
The departure of UA from LHR, if it comes to that (and I think it will) may actually solve problems in that it means that the new US operators will come into LHR without new slots having to be created, something which would be very difficult with the current limitations.
Ironically, the problems in its STAR Alliance partner would allow BMI British Midland to enter the US market, which would be a part of the deal to allow new airlines in. I doubt if it would be restricted to just two airlines. NW and US will want their share as well. When there was a proposal for AA/BA to give up a large amount of slots at LHR to allow more US carriers in, the plan was to allow DL to operate four or five JFK routes, to ATL and (I think) one to CVG. I think CO was to operate to IAH and EWR and NW, to DTW and MSP.
One interesting development would be the change to the cities allowed to access the US from Heathrow. Previously, IAH, ATL and DFW have all been stuck with LGW. Obviously, with the new developments, ATL and IAH would move to LHR and BA would presumably move its IAH and ATL flights to LHR. But what about DFW? Both airlines operate their flights from LGW, but it hardly seems fair for DFW to be stuck with LGW while IAH gets access from LHR? Might there be a change here?
Usairways85 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 3236 posts, RR: 7 Reply 4, posted (10 years 12 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1263 times:
its not as easy as just letting everyone move from LGW to LHR. IF UA ever gives up its LHR slots there are a lot of them, however there aren't enough to had out to all the other US carriers, NW, DL, US, CO; then to allow BA to switch its flts from IAH, ATL, and DFW to LHR, and then finally allow BMI to start service into LHR.
The BA/AA deal is a whole other story, it could happen whenever, 3 months from now or 3 years from now, and IF UA ever gives up its slots that could be whenever. IF the two ever happen they could be 2 years apart.
Ord From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 1371 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (10 years 12 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1258 times:
"Let's not forget that both United and American got their Bermuda II rights because the original designated carriers went bankrupt."
The above statement is completely false. United bought Pan Am's LHR rights in October 1990 (and started service in April 1991), prior to Pan Am filing bankruptcy. And American bought TWA's LHR rights shortly after, again before TWA went bankrupt.
United's LHR rights aren't going anywhere. They will not make the mistake of selling them off.
Arsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 21 Reply 6, posted (10 years 12 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1248 times:
First of all, UA won't be in any rush to give away their LHR rights, that will only happen if the money men decides United needs to offload some of it's assets.
If (big If) UAL does leave LHR, me thinks Delta is the most likely, but NW and CO might not be too happy at the prospect of DL getting all LHR slots. If these slots become available then i expect open skies agreement to begin with Dl leading the pack for the slots. Don't forget BMI who'll be sniffing around for these slots too.
Jrlander From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 1104 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (10 years 12 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1154 times:
If UA stops serving LHR, whether through restructuring or through liquidation, I think either NW, CO, or DL will get the rights. I think that Delta might be able to benefit the most from them, due to its market shares in NYC, BOS, southern Florida, and the DC markets. CO could benefit from their EWR hub. NW could benefit as they could serve DTW and MSP ( I think that Ber II allows a US carrier to serve LHR from MSP, though I could be wrong ). But these two markets are not as big as the JFK and BOS markets. In any case, if the proposed CO/NW/DL alliance goes through, I would expect whichever carrier gets the access to serve LHR from all cities with major operations of one of the 3 carriers. For instance, if DL got them, I would expect them to fly to LHR from JFK, BOS, EWR, DTW, MSP, etc.
VS11 From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1014 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (10 years 12 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 1098 times:
I admit that I am not entirely familiar with the transferring of LHR rights from PanAm and TWA to United and American, but I do believe that the rights were sold because of financial diffulties. Again, I may be wrong but I do not think that TWA and PanAM would have sold their LHR rights if they did not have to. Even if they sold them prior to filing bankruptcy it must have been more of a better timing issue, in terms of getting a better deal out of it. At least, in the case of PanAm, it went bankrupt in 1991 I believe so the few months do not really count. I do not know TWA's story, I admit.
Coronado From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1090 posts, RR: 2 Reply 12, posted (10 years 12 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1080 times:
NWA may have the lift capacity for LHR and support DL and CO. DL is parking is MD-11's. NWA continues to operate over 30 747's another 23 DC-10-30's and has 36 A330 on order or on option with deliveries starting in 5 months. If NWA needs to move some aircraft to increase service to London from SLC, ATL; JFK; ORD; etc KLM probably can cover for them on other routes.
NWA seems experienced enough in operating international service from airports that are not their primary gateways including international service from BOS; LAX: SFO: SEA: IAD; LAS etc.
The Original Coronado: First CV jet flights RG CV 990 July 1965; DL CV 880 July 1965; Spantax CV990 Feb 1973
AA717driver From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 1566 posts, RR: 13 Reply 13, posted (10 years 12 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1065 times:
VS11--TWA didn't sell the London routes(BWI and PHL-LGW went, too) because of financial difficulties. Carl Icahn(who raped...er, excuse me, owned) TWA at the time progressively cooked the books to make the London routes unprofitable. Yeah, right.
He then sold them to AA for $400M+. Amazingly, AA made money on them and TWA sunk further into financial ruin. Anyone who forces UAL to sell LHR routes is certainly not interested in running an airline.TC
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16555 posts, RR: 52 Reply 14, posted (10 years 12 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 1018 times:
CO and DL still have plenty of aircraft waiting to be pulled back from the Dessert (DC-10s, MD-11s etc) and plenty of furloughed pilots who want to work, they also have lots of defered aircraft Boeing would love to delivery.