aviacsa55
Topic Author
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2012 8:46 pm

Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sat Apr 21, 2012 8:26 pm

When I was checking Wikipedia, it has been noticed that BD left Star Alliance for the merger of British Airways. Is Star Alliance really having trouble with there members because for the first time ever, it already lost 3 members in the same year, 2012. CO merged and ceased operations to UA, which is also a member, JK collapsed, thanks to QR, and BD officially left the alliance when they are merging operations with BA. Have any questions or something tell me, please reply.
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sat Apr 21, 2012 8:31 pm

Not to nitpick, but...

Quoting aviacsa55 (Thread starter):
it already lost 3 members in the same year, 2012. CO merged and ceased operations to UA,

That's only really losing a member in name - the benefits have remained.

Quoting aviacsa55 (Thread starter):
JK collapsed, thanks to QR,

QR was most definitely not at fault.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
Byrdluvs747
Posts: 2375
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:25 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sat Apr 21, 2012 9:36 pm

I have commented about this as well. Star could lose US, TAM and TAP this year.

SAS will be in play as the Norwegian and Swedish governments have parliamentary mandates to sell their shares of the airline. I would absolutely love to see them under AY ownership, but I don't think AY could afford it.

I could also see a scenerio where QF buys a large, but not majority share of NZ.

[Edited 2012-04-21 14:40:02]
The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
 
User avatar
OA260
Posts: 20986
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:50 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sat Apr 21, 2012 9:38 pm

But then again new airlines are joining so its not all bad .
 
RyanairGuru
Posts: 6554
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:33 pm

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 2):
I could also see a scenerio where QF buys a large, but not majority share of NZ.

That one wouldn't happen. I'm almost certain that competition authorities on both sides of the ditch would block it.

What is more (/most) likely is that there is some merger/buyout/whatever between NZ and VA creating two airlines in the region: QF/JQ and NZ/VA.



Just to give some perspective: less than 12 months ago people were asking whether OW were in trouble given that all of its members except CX (and BA - all though they seemed to get forgotten) were loosing money.
Worked Hard, Flew Right
 
boeing773er
Posts: 478
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 7:23 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sat Apr 21, 2012 11:07 pm

Alright, the Star Alliance is not in trouble in any means. They are the largest alliance in the world, they can afford to
"loose" members in one year.

CO was not really lost, if anything CO+UA merging was better for the alliance than anything else. BD and JK weren't the most important members in the alliance, not to undermine their role but still.

The alliance has 25 Members with 5 members joining within one year time. (it may be 27 with 3 joining because I'm not sure if TA and AV are in the alliance yet)

The alliance would be in "trouble" if the whole LH Group, UA, SQ, and NH suddenly left or declared bankruptcy (Chapter 7 or the equivalent)

So overall, *A is still going to the most powerful alliance in the world for awhile.
Work Hard, Fly Right.
 
lhr380
Posts: 2453
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:39 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sat Apr 21, 2012 11:10 pm

Quoting Boeing773ER (Reply 5):

Just because they have lots does not mean they are more powerful
(The views on this site are my own and no one elses)
 
gilesdavies
Posts: 2268
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 7:51 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sat Apr 21, 2012 11:11 pm

Looks like BMI have now officially left Star Alliance, I thought they would remain a member until when the BMI timetable officially ends in October, but this doesn't appear to the case.

http://www.staralliance.com/en/press/bmi-removal-prp/

I wonder how this will effect LHR as a Star Alliance hub? While there are many SA carriers operating there, there is now no resident airline... Is it likely we might see some routes have their aircraft size downgraded, by these airlines, as there will not be as much feeder traffic?

On a seperate note, if the US Airways and American Airlines merger goes through, we could potentially see another loss to Star Alliance. I am sure One World will do all in it's power to maintain a member in North America.

While US might not be as important to Star Alliance as the likes UA/CO, the airline has a huge presence on the East Coast of the USA, and this is likely to have an impact on feeder traffic to other Star Alliance carriers.
 
ORDJOE
Posts: 648
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 2:27 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sat Apr 21, 2012 11:25 pm

Airlines come and go, BD and JK were minor players in the grand scheme, If star lost LH, NH! UA NZ SQ Or TG then that would be far worse.
 
AA94
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:37 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sat Apr 21, 2012 11:28 pm

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 1):
That's only really losing a member in name - the benefits have remained.

   Star has only really "lost" the separate entity that is Continental. They haven't lost any destinations or benefits as a result of that - CO is just part of UA now.

Quoting Boeing773ER (Reply 5):
The alliance would be in "trouble" if the whole LH Group, UA, SQ, and NH suddenly left or declared bankruptcy (Chapter 7 or the equivalent)

   These are the major alliance players. Members like Spanair, not to make light of their bankruptcy or anything, are really only minor players. Spanair provided a strong intra-Spain and intra-Europe network, but their departure hasn't really changed much, other than the options that Spain-based flyers had previously. Star still remains strong in Europe with airlines like LH, TP, OS, SK, LX.

Star is probably the strongest alliance in terms of route network and the amount of high-quality carriers that are members. An alliance with 25 member carriers, 5 pending members, and 1250+ destinations in 189 countries is hardly "in trouble."
If you can't take the heat, you best get out of the kitchen
 
boeing773er
Posts: 478
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 7:23 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sat Apr 21, 2012 11:49 pm

Quoting lhr380 (Reply 6):

Technically yes they are more powerful if they have a fleet of 400; compared to a fleet of 50. The alliance would be in a much worse position if it lost an airline with a fleet of 400 than 50. In terms of JK and BMI not being in the alliance, the were not a large niche type of airline. The LH group can easily cover all destinations they use to serve.

All BMI did for Star was to present them with a bigger presence in LHR. But the Star Alliance has many Euro airlines compared to OW and Skyteam. LH, LX, OS, SN, LO, OU, KF, A3, JP, SK, TP, and TK they will not be lacking in European presence in LHR.

Now to replace JK, they have TP in Portugal to cover some of their routes, and then the large list of Euro *A members, they will be able to cover all of them.

I am not saying they were unimportant, but they weren't a huge part of *A
Work Hard, Fly Right.
 
SuperCaravelle
Posts: 261
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:04 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:17 am

The main and only trouble I see for Star is South America, with TAM leaving and Gol likely going to Skyteam. Together with the rather persistent TAP Portugal rumors (going IAG) they would lose out. Spanair is no problem, it always felt like an afterthought to me, just to have a Spanish Star Alliance carrier.
 
ETinCaribe
Posts: 428
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 11:57 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:31 am

Part of the ebb and flow of alliances, not too concerning. My money is still on them, even with TAM's loss which is huge, they still get to compete in Latam.
 
User avatar
huaiwei
Posts: 258
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 4:36 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 2:03 am

Quoting aviacsa55 (Thread starter):
CO merged and ceased operations to UA

As others have said, it is a net gain, not a lost. In fact, I would say Star would not have even gained CO at all if there was no merger between CO and UA.

At the end of the day, the future of all three alliances lies in the emerging markets. I felt Star's inability to keep a major presence in Shanghai through the lost of Shanghai Airlines and its failure to keep China Eastern out of the hands of other alliances a bigger blow compared to even the potential loss of US.

It must, therefore, fight hard to grab both Air India and Jet Airways to corner the other major market, a victory of which will far eclipse many other smaller losses here and there.
It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
 
User avatar
hhslax2
Posts: 130
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 8:16 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 3:19 am

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 13):
I would say Star would not have even gained CO at all if there was no merger between CO and UA.

CO joined *A before the merger because of the DL/NW merger.
 
User avatar
Coal
Posts: 2257
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:14 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:20 am

Quoting huaiwei (Reply 13):
At the end of the day, the future of all three alliances lies in the emerging markets. I felt Star's inability to keep a major presence in Shanghai through the lost of Shanghai Airlines and its failure to keep China Eastern out of the hands of other alliances a bigger blow compared to even the potential loss of US.

But you have CA which have an excellent connecting hub at PEK (vs. MU's two hubs at SHA and PVG and the terrible connectivity), not to mention CA flies pretty much to everywhere you need to go to in China. Soon you will also have ZH to cover more of Southern China, which in turn will give Star two hubs, one in the north and one in the south of China, which I think is more complementary than having PEK and SHA/PVG.

Cheers
Coal
Nxt Flts: MI RGN-SIN | SQ SIN-RGN-SIN | CX SIN-HKG-PVG | SQ PVG-SIN
 
usxguy
Posts: 919
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:28 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:38 am

Regarding connectivity @ LHR - does the Alliance *have* to do that? Why can't LHR just be a fairly large spoke in their system?

I'd like to see a list of markets flown by BMI from LHR/LGW/GLA that aren't already covered by LH (for Asia/Mid East/Africa connections) or CO/UA (for transatlantic links)

-n
xx
 
AF022
Posts: 1630
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2003 10:41 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:51 am

I think shedding some European hubs and introducing overseas hubs like ADD is a good tradeoff for Star. I mean, does there need to be 40 ways to get from Athens to Glasgow?
 
LJ
Posts: 4103
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:37 am

Quoting AF022 (Reply 17):
I think shedding some European hubs and introducing overseas hubs like ADD is a good tradeoff for Star. I mean, does there need to be 40 ways to get from Athens to Glasgow?

Indeed, with the addition of ADD they have at least a hub in Africa, unlike oneworld (which considerably lacks coverage in Africa).

BTW won't Avianca Brazil join Star when TAM leaves?

Quoting Coal (Reply 15):

But you have CA which have an excellent connecting hub at PEK (vs. MU's two hubs at SHA and PVG and the terrible connectivity), not to mention CA flies pretty much to everywhere you need to go to in China. Soon you will also have ZH to cover more of Southern China, which in turn will give Star two hubs, one in the north and one in the south of China, which I think is more complementary than having PEK and SHA/PVG.

Yes, but they lost MU to Skyteam, which means that they still have more options in China then any other alliance.
 
kiwiandrew

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 7:03 am

Quoting LJ (Reply 18):
Yes, but they lost MU to Skyteam,

They lost FM to MU , which then joined Skyteam. They did not 'lose' MU as they were never part of *A.
 
xiaotung
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 7:58 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 7:07 am

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 19):
They lost FM to MU , which then joined Skyteam. They did not 'lose' MU as they were never part of *A.

In a way they did. They lost the bid to SkyTeam. At one point *A CEO was confident MU would pick *A.
 
kiwiandrew

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 7:42 am

Quoting xiaotung (Reply 20):
In a way they did. They lost the bid to SkyTeam. At one point *A CEO was confident MU would pick *A.

Oneworld, who had much more at stake than *A since they don't have a mainland Chinese carrier could equally be said to have 'lost' MU, and there were certainly people at OW who were equally certain that they had MU 'in the bag' .

Regardless, it is a matter of semantics, neither *A nor OW had MU to begin with . If we are going to go down that track we might as well say that Skyteam 'lost' JL or that OW 'lost' SQ.

Back on to the actual topic.

Yes, *A have lost a couple of small members JK and BD) , and will almost certainly lose a couple of far more significant ones ( US and JJ) . However, they also have new members coming on board and have a pretty healthy geographical spread of coverage. Is the loss a pain? Yes, of course it is. Is A* in trouble ? No more so than the industry in general.
 
Byrdluvs747
Posts: 2375
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:25 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:35 am

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 4):
That one wouldn't happen. I'm almost certain that competition authorities on both sides of the ditch would block it.

What is more (/most) likely is that there is some merger/buyout/whatever between NZ and VA creating two airlines in the region: QF/JQ and NZ/VA.

There wold be no legal reason to block it, as QF wouldn't be taking a majority share. Even so, teaming up with NZ investors QF could include covenants like all NZ-America/Asia routes are flown on NZ metal or a reduction of Jestar metal between Oz-NZ.

Quoting SuperCaravelle (Reply 11):
and Gol likely going to Skyteam.

Everyone likes to spout that, but its actually false.


Gol is not a member of a global alliance, and said the Delta deal doesn't envision Gol joining SkyTeam club, which also includes Air France-KLM SA, AeroMéxico, China Southern Airlines and Korean Air.

Constantino de Oliveira Jr., Gol's chief executive, said on Wednesday that he intends for the airline to stay independent of alliances, but build strong bilateral relationships.


online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203501304577084802263746384.html

Quoting AA94 (Reply 9):
Star still remains strong in Europe with airlines like LH, TP, OS, SK, LX.
Quoting Boeing773ER (Reply 10):
LH, LX, OS, SN, LO, OU, KF, A3, JP, SK, TP, and TK they will not be lacking in European presence in LHR.

Of those carriers, three could be considered in play (SK, LO, TP). SN, LX, and OS are only safe from defecting because they are owned by LH.

Quoting kiwiandrew (Reply 21):
However, they also have new members coming on board and have a pretty healthy geographical spread of coverage.


That's part of the problem. The airlines being added are small LCC-ish brands or second tier airlines that don't have the brand awareness. Adria, Blue1?
The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
 
UALWN
Posts: 2171
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 2:12 pm

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 22):
The airlines being added are small LCC-ish brands or second tier airlines that don't have the brand awareness. Adria, Blue1?

Errrr, what about Eva Air?

http://focustaiwan.tw/ShowNews/WebNe...ail.aspx?Type=aALL&ID=201203290017
AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/787/AB6/310/32X/330/340/380
 
CALMSP
Posts: 2895
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 3:18 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 3:16 pm

losing US will do nothing to Star Alliance. They pretty much bring absolutely nothing to the table.
 
boeing773er
Posts: 478
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 7:23 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 3:29 pm

Quoting CALMSP (Reply 24):

Not true, they do have some usefulness to Star, they do feed MUC, FRA, BRU, LIS, and ZUR a little bit from their hubs. They aren't as important as UA because I don't believe they have any JVs with any of the airlines.

If US/AA will leave the *A it won't devastate the alliance, but it will hurt a little bit.
Work Hard, Fly Right.
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 981
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:17 pm

With very few exceptions, all alliances and airlines are in trouble. Not a good industry. Star may actually be in the best shape of them all. Anyway, nitpicking on one minor detail:

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 2):
SAS will be in play as the Norwegian and Swedish governments have parliamentary mandates to sell their shares of the airline. I would absolutely love to see them under AY ownership, but I don't think AY could afford it.

I suspect AY does better if SK continues to have the trouble it already has (lack of strategic planning, governments and unions driving their own agendas, no major intercontinental network, ...)

Plus it would be really hard to buy SK and not have the same troubles remain.

Then again, buying the local traffic parts in Sweden and Norway might make sense, if AY could at the same time redirect part of those flights via HEL so that the feed to their profitable intercontinental network would increase.
 
UAL777UK
Posts: 2107
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:16 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:30 pm

Quoting Boeing773ER (Reply 25):

I think the words there of significance are "little bit". Star will lose no major sleep if US leaves IMHO
 
stratacruiser
Posts: 192
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 7:07 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 5:11 pm

Having US, UA and AC gives Star considerably more capacity and route options in North America than other Alliances. This in turn means more *A frequent flyers who will show preference for other *A carriers when traveling internationally. If a US/AA merger happens, it would likely mean that US frequent flyers shift en masse from LH to BA when traveling to or within Europe for example. Likewise, CX and JL would benefit in Asia at the expense of SQ, TG, NH and CA. If US indeed pulls out of *A, I would miss being able to use US BOS-PHX nonstops instead of UA connections.

Dave
 
VC10er
Posts: 2187
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:08 pm

Can someone explain the TAP issue? Given their huge focus on Brazil I would assume it would further add to Star's weakness in LATAM. I have found them to be a great advantage..especially their GIG nonstops to Lisbon.

I assume when TAM goes, LH would fill that expensive FRA/GIG non stop.
The world is missing love, let's use our flights to spread it!
 
LJ
Posts: 4103
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 1999 8:28 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 7:42 pm

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 2):
I have commented about this as well. Star could lose US, TAM and TAP this year.

My understanding is that TAP is that some Angolan investors are very interested to invest in TAP (no airline related party), or have they backed down? Sounds very hypothetical to include TP in a list of airlines Star could loose this year.
 
Byrdluvs747
Posts: 2375
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:25 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:23 pm

Quoting LJ (Reply 30):
My understanding is that TAP is that some Angolan investors are very interested to invest in TAP (no airline related party), or have they backed down? Sounds very hypothetical to include TP in a list of airlines Star could loose this year.

I don't think it's hypothetical at all. If Finnair was said to be interested instead of IAG, then I would agree. However, its been stated by numerous times that TP is at the top of the list of IAG's merger candidates.

Also I'm not sure if they can get around it, but these Angolan investors would be prevented from purchasing the entire airline due to EU law.
The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
 
mozart
Posts: 2022
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 12:21 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 4:20 am

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 22):
The airlines being added are small LCC-ish brands or second tier airlines that don't have the brand awareness.

EVA? Avianca-TACA?

Other than that:

CO = not really lost
JK = good riddance
US = a pity though, Star had the upper hand in the US market, ultimately the three alliances will be fairly even
TP = ouch!
TAM = now that is the *real* loss!

On the same level of uncertain rumour there are rumours that Jet Airways might join
 
Byrdluvs747
Posts: 2375
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:25 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 6:30 am

Quoting mozart (Reply 32):
EVA? Avianca-TACA?

Yes, I would consider EVA and AV second tier. Definitely not on the BA, LH, CX level.
The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
 
UALWN
Posts: 2171
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:11 am

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 33):
Yes, I would consider EVA and AV second tier.

If BR and AV are second tier, then what are the airlines Star has lost so far, JK and BD?
AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/787/AB6/310/32X/330/340/380
 
Burkhard
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:34 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:32 am

Loosing US is half of the gain they had with CO, or maybe even less. Star is in less troubles than the other alliances which have main members (AA, AF) in a deathly struggle, but all the industry has troubles so has Star.
 
Byrdluvs747
Posts: 2375
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:25 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 9:10 am

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 35):
than the other alliances which have main members (AA, AF) in a deathly struggle,

I wouldn't call AA's issues deathly. AA will exist with or without US. I can't speak to AF's problems.
The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
 
RCS763AV
Posts: 3645
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 1:22 am

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:52 pm

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 33):
Yes, I would consider EVA and AV second tier.

It depends what you call second tier. They are both leaders in the markets they serve which are quite large in their regions and bring a large array of new destinations to the alliance. Not to mention, AVTA have over 120 aircraft spread out over four hubs throughout latin america without counting their brazilian operation and EVA operates a considerable long haul fleet and network from a country with one of the most dynamic export economies in Asia. Both of the companies transported more passengers and had more revenue than the likes of SN, OS, and TP, who are also market leaders in their own homes.

I wouldn't call them second tier. Second tier is something like Adria, Croatia or Blue1 which operate small networks designed only to feed the larger european hubs and only add a handful of destinations to the network plus operate tiny fleets. Certainly not on the same league as EVA or AviancaTaca. Then third tier would be something like Aerosur or Impulse Airlines.

Also, Star is doing fine. I don't know what this all doom and gloom thing is coming from. UA is doing great, LH is sorting things out but has a bright future, the asian carriers are mostly Ok.

The only negative things are maybe JJ leaving and TP possibly getting snatched by IAG. Remember that the main stockholder of the AVTA holding has also been looking at the numbers on that deal.

But star is still the largest of the alliances and it's not going to change in the near of mid-term.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Crew
Posts: 11741
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Star Alliance In Trouble?

Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:32 pm

How can one say *A is in trouble due to losing a few minor members? Including one sold off as it wasn't profitable For LH!

Does *A have holes?    India, China, and I'm sure somewhere else.

Quoting Boeing773ER (Reply 5):
They are the largest alliance in the world, they can afford to
"loose" members in one year.

Yes. In some ways, it is 'healthy churn' for *A. However, if there is a concern for *A, it is the gaps in their network, in the large developing areas. It will be interesting to see how they close some of those gaps.

Quoting ordjoe (Reply 8):
Airlines come and go, BD and JK were minor players in the grand scheme, If star lost LH, NH! UA NZ SQ Or TG then that would be far worse.

SQ isn't the most loyal member... If anyone will defect that would hurt *A, it would be SQ.

Lightsaber
"They did not know it was impossible, so they did it!" - Mark Twain