Ciro
Topic Author
Posts: 639
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 1999 5:00 pm

Oneworld Or Star Alliance?

Mon Aug 16, 1999 5:08 pm

If we consider all the members and quasi-members, which strategic alliance will be the largest in the world? OW or SA? Tell me why!   Brazilian cheers!
The fastest way to become a millionaire in the airline business is to start as a billionaire.
 
Guest

RE: Oneworld Or Star Alliance?

Mon Aug 16, 1999 5:20 pm

I think "oneworld" alliance is a better alliance considering the members have a very strict joining criteria and quality standards in products and services.

oneworld alliance offers better frequent flyer recognition status. These include Ruby, Sapphire and Emerald. The priviliges include Business Class check-in, priority boarding, priority waitlisting, Business Class lounge access (Sapphire) and First Class lounge access(Emerald).

Other priviliges include smoother transfers at airports, round-the-world oneworld explorer fares which includes a cheap Concorde surcharge when travelling on Business or First Class fares. The oneworld RTW fare is based on the number of continents visited unlike Star Alliance which is based on the number of miles covered.

Members of oneworld include: American Airlines, British Airways, Canadian Airlines International, Cathay Pacific and Qantas. Future members include: Iberia and Finnair (September 1999) and LanChiles (early 2000). Other members will include: Japan Airlines, Aer Lingus, South African Airways, Swissair and Air Pacific.

The Star Alliance frequent flyer recogntion status is limited to two: Silver and Gold and this is one of the biggest weaknesses of the alliance. There is a wide gap in between the two levels. The major problem with Star Alliance is its focus on "Quality" of airlines joining. for example, they have announced that Mexicana Airlines will be joining their alliance. The quality of their product can not be compared to that of Thai Airways or Ansett Australia.

The final word is "It is not the quantity that matters, it is quality that counts". Star might have more members but it is the global reach that really matter. Are the alliance members willing to get you where you want to go! After all, it is the consumers choice!

 
Guest

RE: Airline2000

Tue Aug 17, 1999 1:02 am

You said that Mexicana cannot be compared to Thai. Have you ever actually flown on either of these two airlines?

United946
 
DeltaShuttle
Posts: 318
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 12:47 am

RE: Oneworld Or Star Alliance?

Tue Aug 17, 1999 1:27 am

Continental and Northwest are getting along just fine, and people say Continental's a much higher quality product. Besides how do you know Lan Chile compare to Cathay Pacific!?
 
FLY777UAL
Posts: 4830
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 3:49 am

Airline2000

Tue Aug 17, 1999 1:41 am



Airline2000 wrote:
-------------------------------
I think "oneworld" alliance is a better alliance considering the members have a very strict joining criteria and quality standards in products and services.
-------------------------------
--Yea...sure!

-------------------------------
oneworld alliance offers better frequent flyer recognition status. These include Ruby, Sapphire and Emerald. The priviliges include Business Class check-in, priority boarding, priority waitlisting, Business Class lounge access (Sapphire) and First Class lounge access(Emerald).
-------------------------------
--so basically Sapphire and Emerald are the EXACT same thing as Star's Silver and Gold status...I sure don't see OW's "Ruby" lounges anywhere...do you?

-------------------------------
Other priviliges include smoother transfers at airports
-------------------------------
--Let's try and have a smooth transfer at LHR! I dare you to try it!

-------------------------------
Members of oneworld include: American Airlines, British Airways, Canadian Airlines International, Cathay Pacific and Qantas. Future members include: Iberia and Finnair (September 1999) and LanChiles (early 2000). Other members will include: Japan Airlines, Aer Lingus, South African Airways, Swissair and Air Pacific.
--------------------------------
--Members of Star Alliance include: United Airlines, Lufthansa, SAS, Thai, Varig, ANA (currently under observer status--expected to join late '99), Air Canada, Mexicana (soon), Air New Zealand, Ansett Australia, Singapore Airlines (expected to join '00)
--you said above that OW has "very strict joining criteria and quality standards in products and services."...so why are Air Pacific and Iberia going to join if the 'criteria' are sooo high? When was the last time you saw Aer Lingus, South African, Air Pacific, Iberia, Canadian Airlines, and Finnair receive any type of passenger service award? Surely not very recently!

-------------------------------
The Star Alliance frequent flyer recogntion status is limited to two: Silver and Gold and this is one of the biggest weaknesses of the alliance. There is a wide gap in between the two levels.
-------------------------------
--A wide gap between the two? Please...it is the same thing as 'Ruby" and "Emerald" status on OW!

-------------------------------
The major problem with Star Alliance is its focus on "Quality" of airlines joining. for example, they have announced that Mexicana Airlines will be joining their alliance. The quality of their product can not be compared to that of Thai Airways or Ansett Australia.
-------------------------------
--However, we're not comparing Latin American carrier's services against Thai or Ansett for the simple reason that the two markets (Latin and Pacific) demand VERY DIFFERENT levels in service and quality. The only way you can fairly compare airlines is if ---THEY COMPETE TOGETHER IN THE SAME MARKET---

------------------------------
The final word is "It is not the quantity that matters, it is quality that counts". Star might have more members but it is the global reach that really matter. Are the alliance members willing to get you where you want to go! After all, it is the consumers choice!
-----------------------------
--Well it sure is a good thing that with --only-- UA, AC, LH, SAS, TG, VG, ANZ, and Ansett A. that they can get you to over 575 destinations on six continents!



That's all for now...

FLY777UAL
 
Guest

RE: Oneworld Or Star Alliance?

Tue Aug 17, 1999 5:44 am

Very interesting that you should point out that it takes seven carriers for Star to carry passengers to "over 575 destinations on six continents"... oneworld, with only five carriers, operates to over 600 cities in 138 countries on 6 continents. oneworld is, according to number of destinations, the larger alliance if FLY777UAL's figure is correct. (My reference is the oneworld website.) I don't know about Star, but oneworld employs over 220,000 people, and has the largest fleet of aircraft.

This is a side note, and not of my own creation. I openly admit that the only oneworld carrier I have flown is American and that the only Star carrier I have flown is United. My friend, however, has had the opportunity to travel with other carriers and this is what he told me when he heard about the creation of oneworld last year...

The problem with United is that they choose second rate partners... LH instead of BA, ANZ instead of Qantas, Thai instead of Cathay...

This friend flies United most of the time, so he is not one who is biased against UA or it's alliance... this was just his observation. As I said, I have yet to fly on most of these carriers, but those who have seem to prefer the oneworld cadre over Star.
 
FLY777UAL
Posts: 4830
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 3:49 am

RE: Oneworld Or Star Alliance?

Tue Aug 17, 1999 6:53 am

UAL didn't choose second rate carriers...UA has been with LH for a long time---a lot longer than when they were with BA...ANZ is a much better carrier than QF. ANZ has received more awards for service and innovation that QF, and also carries more satisfied customers. Thai, however is the 'reject' of Star. The only reason TG is in there is because of their long time affiliation with SAS, so in a way, it was a package deal...SAS comes with Thai.

FLY777UAL
 
patroni
Posts: 1372
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 1999 7:49 am

RE: Oneworld Or Star Alliance?

Tue Aug 17, 1999 7:18 am

"The problem with United is that they choose second rate partners... LH instead of BA, ANZ instead of Qantas, Thai instead of Cathay... "

What?? Second rate partners??
I must admit that I am - though being German national - not a too big fan of LH, but if I compare LH with BA, LH is by far the winner... LH has a comfortable, hyper modern fleet while BA flies 747-100's from 1970 with a bad Economy and only average business class product.. when connecting via LHR, I missed several times my connection flight due to bad weather and didn't get a compensation - not even a free coke - by BA for the useless hours I wasted sitting in Terminal 4 (And at this time I was - thanks to Deutsche BA - a "status customer" of their Frequent Flier programm..so much about these "privileges"....). BTW, BA claims that a 70min transfer in LHR is considered to be a short one.... ever transfered in Amsterdam?? 40 min and your on your next flight - and that's standard...

About seats : BA is also the one to put a ten abreast seating in the 777 economy class on flights to the Caribbean while the 777 normally only has 9 seats per row... so speaking of quality, huh?? At least LH doesn't squeeze 11 passengers/row in their 747 when it flies to Bangkok or so...


Thai instead of Cathay : Well, ok, CX is better than TG, but LH's newest partner is SQ... and SQ's service standards dwarf those of TG and CX, at least from the experiences we made so far.

About Canadian : I just tried to fly once with them from Vancouver to Calgary and they cancelled our reservation due to an employees error... well, when we arrived at the airport, the flight was already overbooked, but they didn't want to refund our tickets until we were about to sue them... so please don't talk of quality as far as CP is concerned....

About the American partners : well, I flew DL (ok), NW (hmmm..), Valujet (ok) and AA (lousy..) so far but have no experiences with UA.

Oh yes, and I flew already on Aeromexico's MD88 from Los Mochis via Hermosillo to Tucson - I can promise you, it was the first flight ever I was really afraid of.. I nearly kissed the tarmac when disembarking at Tucson... well, and Aeromexico is a BA partner as well..

Best regards,

Thomas
 
Guest

RE: Oneworld Or Star Alliance?

Tue Aug 17, 1999 7:49 am

Hrmm...
On the Thai issue, I have one note:
I heard a rumor (remind you this is a rumor, but could be true) that Lufthansa was so fed up with Thai that LH was considering leaving the Star Alliance. And as for that SAS - Thai linkup, why not just boot both of them out... from what I've heard SAS has pretty lousy service.

About oneworld:
American has very good customer service from what I've dealt with. British Airways is also very friendly and kind when I've dealt with them. Iberia was very graceful while checking us into our Finnair flight to Helsinki from Barcelona, Qantas has the advantage of plastering their name and all sorts of other perks on Sydney's new domestic terminal, as well as a great fleet. Cathay is something else, they are one of the best airlines I've seen. And LanChile, although I've heard very little, seems to be shaping up nicely.

As for Finnair, well I've dealt with them almost exclusively for all my travel arrangements. Their long-haul aircraft are all MD-11's (lovely) the service is stupendous, the food has earned so gosh darn many awards, and to top it off, connecting times at their home base (Helsinki) are about 30min.

Star may have been the first megaalliance, but oneworld can (and probably will) beat the pants off of Star...

Moi,
Kai
 
gardermoen
Posts: 1343
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 1999 9:52 pm

RE: Oneworld Or Star Alliance?

Tue Aug 17, 1999 9:29 am

While I confess to being pro-Star, I must admit that OneWorld is perhaps the bigger alliance(just look at BA and AA alone). However, I find the service standards on Star carriers to be better than OneWorld carriers. Is Qantas superior to Air NZ? No way! Air NZ has MUCH better service standards than Qantas has any day. I can vouch for that having flown on both airlines many times. Okay, I do admit that Thai certainly is not everyones choice for a world alliance, neither is Mexicana for that matter. From this point of view, Star tends to focus more on capturing world markets than it is on quality. But I find LH, NZ, AN and TG better service wise compared to AA, CP, QF and IB. from all reports, SK is said to be good too and I will know when I fly them for the first time later this year. Star will come out winners once they manage SQ to link up with them. As for CX, this is the only good thing that would make me want to choose OneWorld.
 
Guest

RE: Oneworld Or Star Alliance?

Tue Aug 17, 1999 7:41 pm

I agree with all, Cathay Pacific is the only airline that is making me fly with oneworld alliance.

My concern is the service delivery aspect of the alliances. The Asian airlines do the best service delivery and the others are very ordinary.

If Singapore Airlines joins (one day), that will be a major boost to Star Alliance. I believe that one airline member may have a veto power over kicking another member of the alliance. Thai Airways is a perfect airline that might be asked to leave Star Alliance. Only purely because of political and financial reasons.

It is great to hear a voice on alliances and as mentioned before, it is a matter for consumers to decide upon. No alliance is better, it is up to the preference of each traveller to decide what is convenient to them. The word "convenient" is a major factor for marketing these days. People choose the flights that is most convenient to them. In a nutshell, alliances are all about convenience! It is the matter of who takes you from Point A to B in a minimum time.

If anyone wants to discuss the alliance matters future, please feel free to email me on: oneworldalliance@hotmail.com (a rather strange email some of you may say) Well, after all, I am an alliance analyst for an aviation consultancy.
 
Lufthansa747
Posts: 2953
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 7:45 am

RE: Oneworld Or Star Alliance?

Tue Aug 17, 1999 11:25 pm

Something about Canadian

I flew CP from YYZ to YGK a while ago. At check in this woman didn't even know Kingston's 3 letter code. She asked: "What is this YGK?" When I got to the gate at about 10pm, the TV-monitor said: "Sudbury 19.30". There was nobody at that gate. So I asked a CP gate agent at another gate and she said: "I guess that's the gate, maybe someone will come there." My flight was scheduled to depart 22.30 and the plane was towed there five minutes earlier. The flight crew came with another employee who took the boarding passes...

Canadian is horrible! If TG (with a nice fleet) should leave Star, why is this CP in that sooooo high quality oneworld? If I choose oneworld from HEL to YYZ, I'd fly LHR-YYZ on a crappy CP DC10 or BA 742. With Star I can take AC or LH 744 from FRA with a quick connection at FRA... Too difficult to choose between a D10 and 744...


Lufthansa747
Air Asia Super Elite, Cebu Pacific Titanium
 
FLY777UAL
Posts: 4830
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 3:49 am

Actual "Star" Figures

Wed Aug 18, 1999 1:02 am

With all of the "Star" members: UA, SAS, LH, TG, VG, ANZ, Ansett, AC, and ANA, (not including Mexicana), the Star Alliance flies to over 720 destinations in 110 countries, on six continents, thus providing over 120 other destination options over OneWorld.

FLY777UAL
 
Guest

RE: Lufthansa747

Wed Aug 18, 1999 1:17 am

Dang it hate to keep pointing this out, but every single member on this forum seems to leave Finnair out as a oneworld member. If you were to fly oneworld from HEL to YYZ Lufthansa747, why not fly direct? Finnair operates twice weekly to Toronto (Lester B. Pearson, Terminal 3) with nice, spacious MD-11's that seat in a 3-4-2 arrangement, with great meal service and about a 7:45 flight, compared to a 3 hour flight to FRA, then flying that 744 to Toronto (which takes at least 9 hours) It's your choice. And the AY flight is actually cheaper...

Moi,
Kai
 
Guest

RE: Oneworld Or Star Alliance?

Wed Aug 18, 1999 10:45 am

Even if you didn't take Finnair nonstop, the choice would be easy... "Too difficult to choose between a D10 and 744..." it sure isn't - the DC-10 is far more comfortable than the 744. I'd choose the 10 over a 747 anyday.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos