martinrpo1
Topic Author
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 6:40 pm

BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:18 am

Was the BA/IB merger a bad move for BA? Would a BA/LX or BA/KL merger made more sense and prove better economic results today?
 
ely747
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:28 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:27 am

Quoting martinrpo1 (Thread starter):

To my understanding the key thing for BA was to gain access into a very lucrative South American market (not sure how satisfied BA is on this front so far) I was really hoping that BA-IB tie up would bring a more enhanced network especially for the UK travellers. Having flown on IB metal 2 times (long haul and short haul) I must say that their product delivery is something one would describe as very unattractive and rather poor. BA and IB long haul product simply do not match up each other. IB's economic performance is putting a heavy burden on BA too. It's becoming very costy for IB to operate their long haul fleet. Trimming some latino routes won't put a big smile on W. Walsh's face either ... However I don't think that BA had many options at that time since AF/KL had already sealed the deal. It was a good move for MAD's strategic location. Let's hope BA will utilize this opportunity better in the end.

[Edited 2013-01-14 20:33:47]
 
shuttle9juliet
Posts: 314
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:12 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 9:51 am

I really think, better off without. But at the end of the day it's up to IAG to make the decision not BA although I am positive BA must have some " get out Clause"

Iberia is not a match, it was Willies attempt to get into the lucrative South America, that's all, and why has IAG not brought more airlines into the group? TAP, EI ect?.

As said above they should have paired up with KLM a few years back, a much better product and stable airline, KLM are probably thinking the same too now....
 
offloaded
Posts: 900
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:56 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:01 am

Yes, bad move for sure. I had this very discussion last week with a friend at BA. The cultures are vastly different, the attitude to customer service is also varies wildly. My friend complained frequently of attending meetings in MAD when colleagues from IB rolled up an hour or more late for meetings, if they showed up at all.
To no one will we sell, or deny, or delay, right or justice - Magna Carta, 1215
 
jumpjets
Posts: 1117
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 2:17 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:13 am

Quoting shuttle9juliet (Reply 2):
But at the end of the day it's up to IAG to make the decision not BA although I am positive BA must have some " get out Clause"

IAG is a listed company and IB and BA are two separate trading subsidiaries of IAG. There would be no get out clauses for BA as they technically have no say in anything to do with IB.

If at some point IAG decide that IB was a mistake and decide they don't want it in the group they would have to find a buyer or in extremis close it down.

While IBs/Spains problems might be greater than WW contemplated when the merger was first mooted many years ago I would be pretty sure he was expecting a rough ride in the early years as IAG reshapes the IB operations. In the short term the IAG group results would be a lot better off without IB but you don't buy major subsidiaries 'with problems' for short term gains but for long term benefits - such as the access it gives IAG to landing slots in Madrid [when their ability to grow Heathrow operations is severely constrained].

Maybe if BA had known of the opportunity to buy BD and so have a once in a life time chance to gain a chunk of extra LHR slots they would have been less keen to merge with IB as the BD acquisition does provide them with an [at the time] unexpected opportunity to expand into new markets.
 
point2point
Posts: 2080
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:54 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:17 am

Quoting shuttle9juliet (Reply 2):
As said above they should have paired up with KLM a few years back, a much better product and stable airline, KLM are probably thinking the same too now....

Heavens...... if it were BA/KL, that would have left AF/IB, and would that be left now?

 Wow!
 
shuttle9juliet
Posts: 314
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:12 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:28 am

Quoting point2point (Reply 5):

Funny I was thinking that too ha ha, they would be a match made in heaven...
 
LHRFlyer
Posts: 695
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 12:50 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:42 am

It's easy to forget that at the time BA had very little scope for growth at LHR and had to look elsewhere for growth and BA was not in good financial shape three years ago.

BA has turned around. I don't see why Iberia can't be turned around (although it won't be easy). And the flipside there is a lot of expertise and experience of the restructuring of BA over the past ten years that can be applied to Iberia and not just cost cutting but also improving direct distribution, revenue management etc.

[Edited 2013-01-15 03:42:59]
 
cv990Coronado
Posts: 175
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:38 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:45 am

Oh if only a BA/KL deal had been done. It would have made a GREAT partnership and gone a long way to solving the 3rd runway at LHR problem. What a pity. A big loss for BA and I think KLM would have had a better future too.
SSC-707B727 737-741234SP757/762/3/772/WA300/10/319/2/1-342/3/6-880-DAM-VC10 TRD 111 Ju52-DC8/9/10/11-YS11-748-VCV DH4B L
 
ely747
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:28 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:37 pm

Quoting cv990coronado (Reply 8):

Yes, definitely. KL has extensive network across the UK whereas IB is not a big player .... . the lack of runway capacity is more damaging for the UK economy. .. BA is not a victim as such. They got balls to play around ...

[Edited 2013-01-15 04:44:26]

[Edited 2013-01-15 04:45:41]
 
airbazar
Posts: 6867
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:52 pm

Quoting jumpjets (Reply 4):
IAG is a listed company and IB and BA are two separate trading subsidiaries of IAG. There would be no get out clauses for BA as they technically have no say in anything to do with IB.

Exactly. It may not be good for BA but it's good for IAG who are now the dominant company in the TATL market. If anyone is going to dump IB it will be IAG not BA. People need to remind themselves that IAG is not BA.
 
AIR MALTA
Posts: 1733
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 6:45 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:56 pm

Quoting cv990coronado (Reply 8):
Oh if only a BA/KL deal had been done. It would have made a GREAT partnership and gone a long way to solving the 3rd runway at LHR problem. What a pity. A big loss for BA and I think KLM would have had a better future too

Or even a BA/LX deal would have been great.
Next flights : BRU-ZRH-CAI (LX)/ BRU-FCO-TLV (AZ)
 
MEA-707
Posts: 3666
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 1999 4:51 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:00 pm

Spain is now in a financial recession. I think BA should just be patient and in a few years they can develop a powerhouse which will connect Europe to Latin America. The America's are and will be doing fine economically and Spain will also be back on its feet in a couple of years and then they can return to the stations they left with new A-330s which will have IFE.
Yes, Iberia has a minimal onboard product and their service mentality leaves a lot to be desired but BA was like that as well in the 1980s and they might be able to explain IB how they turned around.
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
 
jfk777
Posts: 5840
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:16 pm

Quoting cv990coronado (Reply 8):
Oh if only a BA/KL deal had been done. It would have made a GREAT partnership and gone a long way to solving the 3rd runway at LHR problem. What a pity. A big loss for BA and I think KLM would have had a better future too.

KLM would have been the "pretty blond prom queen" to merge with, IB was the over weight unattractive girl. KLM-BA would have been the best merger in Europe.
 
User avatar
SKAirbus
Posts: 1459
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:18 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:23 pm

Quoting ely747 (Reply 9):
Yes, definitely. KL has extensive network across the UK whereas IB is not a big player .... . the lack of runway capacity is more damaging for the UK economy. .. BA is not a victim as such. They got balls to play around ...

London Schiphol airport..


Personally I think IB's weakness is their dire product... They offer a dreadful service on their long haul and short haul flights! No PTVs, and buy onboard service in economy. They need to align with their bigger brother.
Next Flights: LHR-OSL (738), OSL-CPH (320), CPH-LHR (321), LHR-HEL (359), HEL-LHR (359)
 
ozglobal
Posts: 2517
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 7:33 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:37 pm

Having flown IB Business Plus on long haul routes like EZE and GRU, I can say that their hard product is really not bad. It's their people and their culture that are to their shame. So long as I can sleep and don't have to deal with their disinterested, soviet style cabin crew, It's a good flight. The only place I've ever seen this level of disinterest in passengers in a premium cabin is in the US.
When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
 
AirGAbon
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:53 pm

But for KL it is more interesting to be with AF.

I don't think KL is unhappy with AF, and before the merger with AF, KL never had such a huge development and expansion.
 
UALWN
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:57 pm

I would say another relevant question is: IB better off without BA? It should be noted that (contrary to BA), IB had benefits for 10 years running prior to the merger into IAG. SInce then, alas, only losses...
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
 
LHRFlyer
Posts: 695
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 12:50 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 2:05 pm

Quoting UALWN (Reply 17):
I would say another relevant question is: IB better off without BA? It should be noted that (contrary to BA), IB had benefits for 10 years running prior to the merger into IAG. SInce then, alas, only losses...

Not this again.

So, tell us. What has BA/IAG done to make Iberia worse off?

As Iberia's highest revenue earning route is reported to be one it doesn't even operate (LHR-JFK) you could ask how much worse off it would be without BA/IAG.

[Edited 2013-01-15 06:06:19]

[Edited 2013-01-15 06:06:38]
 
UALWN
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:06 pm

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 18):
What has BA/IAG done to make Iberia worse off?

I don't know. What I reported are facts, not theories. Maybe one could ask: what has IAG done to improve IB? Invest in the fleet? No. Expand the market presence of IB? No, quite the opposite. Try to build bridges with the employees? No. Instead, all the profit in the IAG group has gone to cover the huge hole in BA's pension fund.
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
 
vv701
Posts: 5773
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:54 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:15 pm

As others have pointed out the ownership of BA as well as a poor performing IB by IAG does not really impact BA in a bad way. However it does have some direct and measurable benefits to BA operations.

For example five former BD aircraft were repainted into BA livery by IB at MAD when they could have been repainted at either LHR or EMA. So I assume BA saw some advantage in using the IB paint shop.

Another example is the BA LHR-MAD service. By transferring the late evening LHR-MAD flight to IB at the same time as the late evening IB MAD-LHR flight was transferred to BA both airlines have lowered costs by avoiding an overnight stop and the additional expenses that involves.

But this is all small beer.

If you access the "Capital Markets Presentation" made by IAG here:

http://www.iagshares.com/phoenix.zht...?c=240949&p=irol-presentations

and go to Slide 13 you will see that IAG were forecasting an increase in revenue of 180 million Euros and a Cost Saving of 90 million Euros for 2012 as recently as last November as a result of the tie up.

It is clear that at a substantial proportion of this increase in revenue and saving in costs, be it 25 per cent or 75 per cent or some other figure, must have accrued to BA. But how much we shall probably never know.
 
babybus
Posts: 2379
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 5:07 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:20 pm

Would I buy a ticket to South America knowing I had to transfer in Madrid and continue with Iberia? The answer is no.

Iberia is a terrible airline in terms of service and attitude and it is the last airline I'd want to spend 10 hours with.

The BA / IB tie up was a mistake. What were they thinking?

With the 787 due to BA soon, surely BA can muster the capacity on their own to operate those 'lucrative' South American routes out of LHR.
and with that..cabin crew, seats for landing please.
 
MIAspotter
Posts: 2848
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 1:57 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:38 pm

The only solution for IB to get their act together is to completely restructure itself, putting knowleadgeable people in charge of the company, not a friend of a friend of the CEO chosen by fingerpointing.

Then create a fair working environment for the employees, ground staff, etc.

Renew their product, cabins, IFE, etc

All under guidance and supervision from BA.

and Voila! a new Iberia...

However this is Spain and that´s never going to happen.

MIAspotter.

[Edited 2013-01-15 08:51:40]
Nos vamos de Vueling?
 
LHRFlyer
Posts: 695
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 12:50 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:41 pm

Quoting UALWN (Reply 19):
I don't know. What I reported are facts, not theories. Maybe one could ask: what has IAG done to improve IB? Invest in the fleet? No. Expand the market presence of IB? No, quite the opposite. Try to build bridges with the employees? No. Instead, all the profit in the IAG group has gone to cover the huge hole in BA's pension fund.

If you understood the terms of the merger you would know that you last assertion is factually incorrect.

IAG has announced investment in the fleet. New A330s are on their way with new vastly improved economy and business class products.
 
UALWN
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:45 pm

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 23):
If you understood the terms of the merger you would know that you last assertion is factually incorrect.

I do understand the terms of the merger, and what I wrote is factually correct.

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 23):
IAG has announced investment in the fleet. New A330s are on their way with new vastly improved economy and business class products.

Yep. 8 A330s. Wow.
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
 
LHRFlyer
Posts: 695
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 12:50 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:46 pm

Quoting UALWN (Reply 24):
I do understand the terms of the merger, and what I wrote is factually correct.

So provide evidence for your assertion that all of IAG's profits have been used to fund the deficit in BA's pension fund.
 
musapapaya
Posts: 990
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 10:02 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:48 pm

Quoting MIAspotter (Reply 22):
The only solution for IB to get their act together is to completely restructure itself, putting knowleadgeable people in charge of the company, not a friend of a friend of the CEO chosen by fingerpointing.

Then create a fair working environment for the employees, ground staff, etc.

Renew their product, cabins, IFE, etc

All under guidance and supervision from BA.

Is BA that good themselves? Or LH better? They have done an awesome job turning LX round!
Lufthansa Group of Airlines
 
avek00
Posts: 3157
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:53 pm

Remember that BA's biggest reason for wanting to join forces with Iberia was to take advantage of the (theoretically) lower labor and sourcing costs of Spain compared to the United Kingdom. The ability to progressively transfer most of BA's non-operating cost base to Spain over time is a big deal, and should reap hundreds of millions of dollars to the BA bottom line once all is said and done. Iberia ultimately benefits as utilization of various parts of its operation increases from servicing both IB's and BA's needs.

IMHO, VS entered into the arrangement with Delta with a similar goal in mind. The UK is an awful place to base an airline from a cost standpoint, and so the name of the game in the 21st century is for British carrier to site as much of their cost base as possible outside of the United Kingdom, by any means necessary.
Live life to the fullest.
 
MIAspotter
Posts: 2848
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 1:57 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:55 pm

Quoting musapapaya (Reply 26):
Is BA that good themselves?

Maybe, with the right people and with the right means, why not.

Quoting musapapaya (Reply 26):
Or LH better? They have done an awesome job turning LX round!

Exactly, I think LH was slightly interested in buying JK... but I guess they quickly ran away when they saw the mess it was... and I guess you know what happenned to JK.

MIAspotter.
Nos vamos de Vueling?
 
UALWN
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:57 pm

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 25):
So provide evidence for your assertion that all of IAG's profits have been used to fund the deficit in BA's pension fund.

At the time of the merger BA's pension fund had a deficit of almost €5b. IB's had no pension liability whatsoever. IB almost waked away from the merger because of this. And in hindsight it would probably have been better for all parties involved.

The pension deficit now has been reduced to €3.75b or so. How? Where has the money come from?
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
 
LHRFlyer
Posts: 695
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 12:50 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:04 pm

Quoting UALWN (Reply 29):
At the time of the merger BA's pension fund had a deficit of almost €5b. IB's had no pension liability whatsoever. IB almost waked away from the merger because of this. And in hindsight it would probably have been better for all parties involved.

The pension deficit now has been reduced to €3.75b or so. How? Where has the money come from?

Not from Iberia. The two airlines operate independently financially and do not cross subsidise each other and each airline has to raise its own funds. Hence, why IAG has said Iberia has to fund its restructuring from its own resources.

To say BA's pension fund has been plugged at the expense of Iberia is wrong. The value of the deficit is more likely to be influenced by the performance of the stock market (which has rallied over the past year) than anything else.

[Edited 2013-01-15 09:10:04]
 
UALWN
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:22 pm

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 30):
The two airlines operate independently financially and do not cross subsidise each other

Yet the deficit in the pension fund is now an IAG liability. Not BA's.

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 30):
The value of the deficit is more likely to be influenced by the performance of the stock market (which has rallied over the past year) than anything else.

The FTSE 100 is now at the same level it was when IB and BA merged, two years ago. So this is not the explanation.
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
 
factsonly
Posts: 2008
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:08 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:28 pm

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 13):
KLM would have been the "pretty blond prom queen" to merge with, IB was the over weight unattractive girl. KLM-BA would have been the best merger in Europe.

Not so sure if I would agree with this point of view. Though general cost savings and efficiency benefits apply to both BA/KL and AF/KL combinations in varying degrees, the biggest differences are actually in network and hub airports.

A BA/KL merger would have brought two big competitors together with lots of overlap in their networks. KLM tends to be strong where BA is strong; North Atlantic, East Africa, Middle East, Asia. Each airline would have added little 'uniqueness' to the merger. Therefore the two airlines would have had to re-align networks significantly to change from overlap to complementarity. In addition, though LON is a large market, LHR is not a great hub airport with lots of connectivity and expansion potential. KLM would have gained LON market, but AMS would have been - even more so - the prime transfer hub for UK regions. BA would not have gained much here.

The reason AF/KL may be the better option is that complementarity was there from the start. AF is focussed on Latin America and both Francophone Caribbean & Francophone Africa. AF is weaker in Middle East and Asia, but strong in Japan and Russia. In addition CDG & AMS both have growth potential, thus offering multiple benefits to both airlines.

As for culture, you may be right. Plenty of successful UK/NL companies operating globally, perhaps fewer so French/Dutch.
 
LHRFlyer
Posts: 695
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 12:50 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:35 pm

Quoting UALWN (Reply 31):
Yet the deficit in the pension fund is now an IAG liability. Not BA's.

No pension funds still sit with BA, not IAG. Again, there is no evidence that BA's pension deficit has been plugged at the expense of Iberia. The merger was always set up so that responsibility for the BA pension funds rested solely with BA and no-one else.
 
AirGAbon
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:46 pm

Quoting factsonly (Reply 32):
AF is weaker in Middle East and Asia

Not that much in Asia: 14/7 HKG, 14/7 PVG, 14/7 PEK, 21/7 NRT, 7/7 ICN, 7/7 KIX, 7/7 SIN, 5/7 SGN, 3/7 BKK + new routes in China and soon KUL.

And I don't add to those routes the code-share with CZ, MU, VN, KE and JL.
 
ely747
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:28 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:52 pm

Quoting babybus (Reply 21):




Not sure if someone raised this but MAD leads the table on lost luggage and so.... Although I must say I really enjoyed walking around the terminal building ... Very classy and spacious, a bit empty though ... Airport experience quite important in rebuilding the airline's reputation ....

[Edited 2013-01-15 09:57:48]
 
ely747
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 2:28 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:02 pm

Quoting avek00 (Reply 27):

To what extent is this feasible? We are talking about the two countries with different cultures, whereas the Dutch and the British can get with each other relatively easy...
 
UALWN
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:16 pm

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 33):
Again, there is no evidence that BA's pension deficit has been plugged at the expense of Iberia.

It has been plugged at the expense of IAG. Hence, indirectly, of IB.
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
 
jfk777
Posts: 5840
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:23 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 7:30 pm

Quoting factsonly (Reply 32):
A BA/KL merger would have brought two big competitors together with lots of overlap in their networks. KLM tends to be strong where BA is strong; North Atlantic, East Africa, Middle East, Asia. Each airline would have added little 'uniqueness' to the merger.

KLM flies to almost as many places in Latin America as Iberia and some it does( dutch caribean). KLM flies to Caracas, Panama, Lima, Guayaquil, EZE, GRI & GIG. The only major city it is alergic to is Bogota.
 
SCL767
Posts: 2812
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:25 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 7:50 pm

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 38):
KLM flies to Caracas, Panama, Lima, Guayaquil, EZE, GRI & GIG. The only major city it is alergic to is Bogota.

KL does not operate into CCS.
AF=BOG, CCS, CUN, EZE, GIG, GRU, HAV, LIM, MEX, PUJ, SCL, SDQ
KL=EZE, GIG, GRU, GYE, HAV, LIM, MEX, PTY, UIO
 
factsonly
Posts: 2008
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 3:08 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:06 pm

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 39):
KLM flies to almost as many places in Latin America as Iberia and some it does( dutch caribean). KLM flies to Caracas, Panama, Lima, Guayaquil, EZE, GRI & GIG. The only major city it is alergic to is Bogota.
Quoting SCL767 (Reply 39):
KL does not operate into CCS.
AF=BOG, CCS, CUN, EZE, GIG, GRU, HAV, LIM, MEX, PUJ, SCL, SDQ
KL=EZE, GIG, GRU, GYE, HAV, LIM, MEX, PTY, UIO

Today yes, but not at the time of the BA/KL discussions. KLM was not doing that well at that time (late 1990s) and closed many low frequency station EZE, MVD, SCL, BOG (briefly operated D10), GIG, PTY, GUA, SJO, CCS (closed after the AF merger).

- EZE, GIG, HAV, PTY are recent returns to the network.
 
avek00
Posts: 3157
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:29 pm

Quoting ely747 (Reply 36):
To what extent is this feasible? We are talking about the two countries with different cultures, whereas the Dutch and the British can get with each other relatively easy...

It's highly feasible -- in fact, strategic cross-border siting of cost and income bases is key to the success of many multinational corporations. For most non-core activities, it's cheaper for IAG to perform the activity in Spain than in the UK. Iberia of course has some real structural issues to work out, but as those are resolved, expect to see the IB side of the house insource as much work from BA as possible.
Live life to the fullest.
 
LHRFlyer
Posts: 695
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 12:50 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:41 pm

Quoting UALWN (Reply 37):
It has been plugged at the expense of IAG. Hence, indirectly, of IB.

No it hasn't. You need to learn how the IAG structure works. Each airline stands on its own two feet, has its own credit identity and raises its own funds. IAG does not finance the member airlines. No member airline cross subsidises the other.
 
edina
Posts: 554
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2003 3:51 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:51 pm

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 42):

I was just about to say the same thing....you beat me to it! It's an open structure....no smoke & mirrors....
Worked on - Caravelle Mercure A300 A320 F27 SD3-60 BAe146 747-100/200/400 DC10-30 767 777 737-400 757 A319 A321
 
UALWN
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 9:00 pm

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 42):
No it hasn't. You need to learn how the IAG structure works. Each airline stands on its own two feet, has its own credit identity and raises its own funds. IAG does not finance the member airlines. No member airline cross subsidises the other.

This is what Expansión, the leading Spanish business newspaper, had to say about the pension situation:
http://www.expansion.com/2012/12/12/...a1886b5594d79fc477ece&t=1358270387
Unfirtunately, only in Spanish.
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
 
ATL
Posts: 81
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 1:20 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 9:22 pm

Quoting babybus (Reply 21):

Would I buy a ticket to South America knowing I had to transfer in Madrid and continue with Iberia? The answer is no.

Iberia is a terrible airline in terms of service and attitude and it is the last airline I'd want to spend 10 hours with.

The BA / IB tie up was a mistake. What were they thinking?

With the 787 due to BA soon, surely BA can muster the capacity on their own to operate those 'lucrative' South American routes out of LHR.


Completely agree. I have no idea what BA was doing. I mean, I suppose they don't have any more space at LHR so maybe they need MAD...

Aren't AA and BA close enough to strike some sort of Latin America deal? AA has ridiculous South American coverage..

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 15):
The only place I've ever seen this level of disinterest in passengers in a premium cabin is in the US.

Dude. You have to stop trying to crap on America in every single thread. I've had excellent service on Delta, Southwest, US, United.. Especially Delta (in my experience). I've flown on a boatload of airlines in a range of classes and let me tell you that I personally put SLC based Delta crews a the top of my list with regards to how they treat passengers. I do agree with AA needing a lot of improvement with regards to how they treat passengers..
 
ozglobal
Posts: 2517
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 7:33 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 9:29 pm

Quoting ATL (Reply 45):
I've flown on a boatload of airlines in a range of classes and let me tell you that I personally put SLC based Delta crews a the top of my list with regards to how they treat passengers.

Really, you're a teenager and you've "flown on a boatload of airlines in range of classes"? Non-rev family travel?
When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
 
User avatar
yellowtail
Posts: 3719
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 3:46 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 9:34 pm

Quoting SCL767 (Reply 39):
EZE, GIG, GRU, GYE, HAV, LIM, MEX, PTY, UIO

you forgot SAL and GUA in that list
When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
 
Summa767
Posts: 1753
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 1:30 am

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 9:51 pm

Quoting UALWN (Reply 44):
This is what Expansión, the leading Spanish business newspaper, had to say about the pension situation:
http://www.expansion.com/2012/12/12/...a1886b5594d79fc477ece&t=1358270387
Unfirtunately, only in Spanish.

Unfortunately for your arguments, the article says that it is BA that might have to increase its contributions to the pension fund. It does not say that IAG will! Furthermore, its says that teh pension fund managers will insist on the restriction on BA of transferring money *to* IAG and IB:

Pero los gestores de los fondos han advertido en reuniones con sus beneficiarios que “el déficit es bastante mayor que hace un año” y van a pedir a BA “el mayor volumen de contribuciones posible”. Además, quieren mantener las restricciones impuestas a la aerolínea británica para que no trasvase dinero a IAG e Iberia.

The pension funds can be very fluid and its a situation that can change from a year to the next depending on the investments. BA needs to increase its contributions, it can afford it, as it is making money.
Iberia's situation is something else. You may be under the illusion that there is no reason why IB is losing money, as it made a profit whilst Spain was riding an economic bubble with limited competition. The fact is that the bubble has burst, and the competition is more substantial -and will be increasingly more on both the European side and the the America's with LATAM, AM, AV looking lean.

It would be silly for IB to increase its market presence under the current situation as more offer would simply mean more losses. It needs to do the restructuring, focus on better service (for that the improvement of the fleet will help, but staff and procedures will also have to improve), then it can re-launch its image, and as the economy heals, it should be able to grow for the future.

BA has already done the homework, grounded 747s, got rid of the 757s, lost thousands of staff -re-negociated contracts, including the new mixed fleet. It was not pain or trouble-free, but BA s now in a position to grow.
The crisis in Spain hit later than in the UK/US, and it is deeper, but restructuring IB looks messy.
 
UALWN
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:27 pm

RE: BA Better Off Without IB

Tue Jan 15, 2013 10:18 pm

Quoting summa767 (Reply 48):
Furthermore, its says that teh pension fund managers will insist on the restriction on BA of transferring money *to* IAG and IB

Exactly! I'm certainly not accusing BA of transferring money to IB! Quite the opposite!

The article goes on to quote an HSBC analyst: "One of the largest risks for IAG is the issue of BA's pensions, which could imply a huge loss of cash [for IAG]." And

Quoting summa767 (Reply 48):
You may be under the illusion that there is no reason why IB is losing money, as it made a profit whilst Spain was riding an economic bubble with limited competition.

Limited competition? While IB was having its streak of 10 profitable years it had to contend with JK, UX, VY, U2, FR.... Tell me a European country with more competition. At that time BA was losing money year after year... with much less competition.
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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aesma, An767, Baidu [Spider], Gemuser, JamesAlice, jet92, petera380, Planesmart, qfflyer, sassiciai, solnabo, StTim, travelhound, uta999 and 264 guests