EY Boss: AB Shall Form Alliance With AF

Tobias2702 · Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:25 pm

Sorry if this should already have been discussed in another thread, I couldn't find anything.

According to Süddeutsche Zeitung, a German quality newspaper, Etihad boss Hogan intends to push Air Berlin (of which 29 percent are owned by EY) into a alliance with AF, aiming at codeshare agreements. Hogan expects AB to make an offer to AF, "oneworld comes second", he is quoted. For him, the big alliances are not a model of the future, but rather such bilaterals. Also according to him, the AB management (possible a post-Mehdorn one) seems to be willing to follow.

Any thoughts and comments? Would it be possible, AB staying a oneworld member but codesharing with AF?

source (German only): www.sueddeutsche.de/wirtschaft/neuer...are-ansage-an-air-berlin-1.1486221

goldorak · Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:37 pm

Quoting Tobias2702 (Thread starter):
Would it be possible, AB staying a oneworld member but codesharing with AF?

yes of course. All alliances are permitting this and there are multiple examples of this. However, if it is an extensive code-share and collaboration agreement between AB and AF, I don't see the point of AB staying in OW. Add to this QR in OW, QR being one of the biggest competitor of EY the owner of AB...

Byrdluvs747 · Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:41 pm

I knew the EY investment would become a problem. Its time for IAG to step in and purchase a big block of AB.

EK413 · Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:44 pm

Quoting Tobias2702 (Thread starter):

Alliance's are of the past... Airlines are now solely relying on establishing stand alone agreements with airlines which suit their needs... QF and EK is an example with QF dropping their JSA with BA...

EK413

MaverickM11 · Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:50 pm

Quoting Tobias2702 (Thread starter):
Etihad boss Hogan intends to push Air Berlin (of which 29 percent are owned by EY) into a alliance with AF, aiming at codeshare agreements. Hogan expects AB to make an offer to AF, "oneworld comes second", he is quoted

And do what? What does an AF/AB tie up do for anyone? It's further confirmation that EY's purchase of AB was not a bright idea and they have no idea what they're doing with it.

aloges · Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:51 pm

Quoting EK413 (Reply 3):
Alliance's are of the past... Airlines are now solely relying on establishing stand alone agreements with airlines which suit their needs...

It happens a couple of times and suddenly, "alliances are a thing of the past"? You're joking, aren't you?

RyanairGuru · Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:44 pm

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 4):
What does an AF/AB tie up do for anyone?

I have no idea whatsoever. Maybe a more comprehensive long haul network via CDG, but I honestly cannot see that being too successful. If anything it sounds more like Hogan is flicking his nose at BA for getting cosy with QR by encouraging the airline that BA sponsored into OW to turn its back on them.

Eagleboy · Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:36 pm

Quoting EK413 (Reply 3):
Alliance's are of the past... Airlines are now solely relying on establishing stand alone agreements with airlines which suit their needs... QF and EK is an example with QF dropping their JSA with BA...

I agree in sense. For some airlines joining an alliance may actually restrict their options......multiple bi-laterals allow smaller carriers to get some of the benefits of an alliance without the ties.

EI for example: codeshare with BA, UA, KL,EY. 3 alliances and 1 'standalone'...... all on separate route so that they don't overlap.

EK413 · Wed Oct 03, 2012 11:01 pm

Quoting aloges (Reply 5):
It happens a couple of times and suddenly, "alliances are a thing of the past"? You're joking, aren't you?

No I'm not joking! Who said it happened once...???
BA/QR are in talks... AA/EK are In talks... AB/EY... NZ/VA... VA/DL... VA/SQ... Shall I continue...?

EK413

aloges · Wed Oct 03, 2012 11:49 pm

Quoting EK413 (Reply 8):
Who said it happened once...???

Errr... nobody did. Would you please wake me up when the first of the current alliances actually starts dissolving without a replacement?

EK413 · Wed Oct 03, 2012 11:53 pm

Quoting aloges (Reply 9):
Quoting EK413 (Reply 8):
Who said it happened once...???

Errr... nobody did. Would you please wake me up when the first of the current alliances actually starts dissolving without a replacement?

Not sure which planet your from but did I even mention a word about the alliances [email protected][email protected]!?

Quoting EK413 (Reply 3):
Alliance's are of the past...

It's time you wake up and read carefully...

EK413

aloges · Thu Oct 04, 2012 1:20 am

Quoting EK413 (Reply 10):
Not sure which planet your from but did I even mention a word about the alliances [email protected][email protected]!?

My point is that I don't see how alliances might be be a thing of the past if they're growing as opposed to shrinking. The dissolution of one would, on the other hand, support your point that they are.

As for the planet issue, I'm from the third rock from the sun. And you?

Quoting EK413 (Reply 10):
It's time you wake up and read carefully...

Nah, it's really rather late. I'll leave the first part for tomorrow.

Tobias2702 · Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:43 am

Reuters has an English translation of the most important parts of the sueddeutsche article:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...ad-airberlin-idUSL6E8L3J0H20121003

Plus, there is an aviationweek article; the main statement:

;Etihad Airways would like to see its European affiliate Air Berlin eventually included in the wide-ranging code-share agreement that Etihad is negotiating with Air France-KLM. “If there is an opportunity, we would be keen to see [the inclusion of Air Berlin] happen,” Etihad CEO James Hogan told Aviation Week at the airline’s headquarters in Abu Dhabi. The code-share negotiations with Air France-KLM have been “very good and are continuing,” Hogan says.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article....l/avd_10_02_2012_p01-01-502024.xml

PanHAM · Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:11 am

Nice "quality" newspaper, this "Sueddeutsche Zeitung". Just learned that Etihad's hub is located at Doha.

Nice investor as well, who despite having only a bit more than a blocking minority, claims to call the shots at AB by telling them to write off their recent investment in OW in favour of couchez avec AF.

Now, can we trust the quality newspaper when it speaks about "allianz" (alliance) with AF/KL but little about code-share (except via DOH, OK they mean AUH, I guess).

AF and KL have managed very well to feed traffic from numerous German ciities to their hubs, what do they need AB for? OK, once could say that about BA as well, all three comb the German market since the early 50s, long before LH was re-invented-.

Interesting is, that the three major Gulf carriers ponder the valkue of alliances in first place. Which value do alliances have to their business model? That may be different for a Europe based carrier.

Ifat the nend pof the day, if AB can stay in OW and gets a couple of code shares on AF KL flights and vv, why not.

BTW, Mr mehdorn has, from the start of his engagement at AB, a contract which terminates in 2013.

LH422 · Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:22 am

And this comes a day after Air France announced it was decreasing capacity to Germany.

http://www.spiegel.de/reise/aktuell/...ege-nach-deutschland-a-859200.html (in German)

According to the article, they will drop CDG-LEJ and LYS-HAM. MRS-HAM and TLS-TXL are going to be seasonal and LYS-STR will be reduced to twice daily from 3x.

Tobias2702 · Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:29 am

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 13):
Nice investor as well, who despite having only a bit more than a blocking minority, claims to call the shots at AB by telling them to write off their recent investment in OW in favour of couchez avec AF.

It's not only the 29 percent share, but also the $255 million loan granted to AB. So to speak, AB could only survive because of the EY investment. Therefore, it is only legitimate that EY expects AB to do them a favor.

PanHAM · Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:10 pm

Quoting Tobias2702 (Reply 15):
Therefore, it is only legitimate that EY expects AB to do them a favor.

You're not doing favors in business. A CEO who does "favors" will be accused of embezzlement (Untreue) quicker than he can spell that word.

EK can certainly send in their wish list for the next supervisory board meeting and we are discussing part of nthat list here, but they do not have a majority and due to the special rquirements in aviation will not have such a majority.

Their constructive involvement in AB is certainly appeciated by other share holders and it is good to learn that AB will turn into a profitable carrier within a foreseeable time.

yowza · Thu Oct 04, 2012 1:13 pm

Quoting aloges (Reply 9):

Errr... nobody did. Would you please wake me up when the first of the current alliances actually starts dissolving without a replacement?

Quoting EK413 (Reply 10):
Not sure which planet your from but did I even mention a word about the alliances [email protected][email protected]!?

You've talked of their demise in vague terms above. Just because airlines make arrangements with non-aligned carriers does not make alliances a thing of the past.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 13):
Nice "quality" newspaper, this "Sueddeutsche Zeitung". Just learned that Etihad's hub is located at Doha.

Aviation journalism is as bad in Germany as it is over here I see.

YOWza

MaverickM11 · Thu Oct 04, 2012 1:47 pm

Quoting yowza (Reply 17):
Aviation journalism is as bad in Germany as it is over here I see.

People don't value journalism, so this is what we get!

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 16):
Their constructive involvement in AB is certainly appeciated by other share holders and it is good to learn that AB will turn into a profitable carrier within a foreseeable time.

I don't think the EY leadership could manage any carrier outside of the UAE, or any other similarly government-supported/supportive environment. EY might as well kiss that money goodbye and hope the AUH feed from Germany is worth it.

PanHAM · Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:58 pm

The EY leadership hs a proven track record outside the UAE. That's not the question.

The point is, that they have a minority share, although they can block certain supervisory board decisions. Such boards however prefer a con-sensus , a broad majority

After all, the AB management can be happy that their shareholder is based in AUH and not in, as was falsely stated, DOH.

I always pity those CV managers....

jetlanta · Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:04 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 19):
The point is, that they have a minority share, although they can block certain supervisory board decisions. Such boards however prefer a con-sensus , a broad majority

Thats all well and good, but the Board also recognizes that EY is the only thing keeping AB afloat. EY may not control literally manage the AB, but they hold tremendous sway.

The Board will follow the financing. That the real world.

MaverickM11 · Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:09 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 19):
The EY leadership hs a proven track record outside the UAE. That's not the question.

Is it? Ansett, BMI, Gulf Air? I'm not so sure it is.

macsog6 · Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:50 pm

Carriers have done code-shares outside of their alliances for years. Probably the best example of this is, IMHO, AS who code-shares with almost anyone who asks it would seem. The AA website lists 10 other carriers, outside of AS and their OW affiliates, on which AA miles can be earned.

I am sure there are other examples, but to take this situation (AB/AF) as an indication that alliances are dead is a rather large leap I think. As the crunch continues, I think alliances will become more important as carriers look for ways to cut costs even more while keeping their flag flying in certain locations.

lightsaber · Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:02 pm

I find it interesting the anger that a member of an alliance is expanding to shore up their profits. While EY is suggesting this, it is sound business for AB.

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 2):
I knew the EY investment would become a problem.

How is this a problem? Expanding a business is usually viewed as a good thing. Is SQ's codeshare with AF a 'problem?' CX doesn't play well with QF, why hasn't that been a problem. In general, OneWorld is not a strong alliance outside of AA/BA and a few other pairings.

Quoting macsog6 (Reply 22):
Carriers have done code-shares outside of their alliances for years.

If alliances didn't code share outside, they would loose too many members. All alliances do is set up a minimum "playing nice" ground rules. The rest is competition as normal.

Quoting aloges (Reply 9):
Would you please wake me up when the first of the current alliances actually starts dissolving without a replacement?

No one mentioned an alliance dissolving. I see it more as being code shared to irrelevance.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 13):
telling them to write off their recent investment in OW in favour of couchez avec AF.

Why is there any writing off? AB is still in OW. They will just now have more AF feed. Win-win.

Lightsaber

PanHAM · Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:04 pm

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 21):
Is it? Ansett, BMI, Gulf Air? I'm not so sure it is.

I am a polite person and sometimes the best management canno change matters when the odds or the owners or both are against them.

Quoting macsog6 (Reply 22):
Carriers have done code-shares outside of their alliances for years

yup, OS and LX with LY came to my mind.

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 20):
The Board will follow the financing. That the real world.

thats guessing. we will never know since what is discussed cannot go outside.

aloges · Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:55 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 23):
No one mentioned an alliance dissolving. I see it more as being code shared to irrelevance.

*sigh*

Quoting aloges (Reply 11):
My point is that I don't see how alliances might be be a thing of the past if they're growing as opposed to shrinking. The dissolution of one would, on the other hand, support your point that they are.

MaverickM11 · Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:11 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 24):

I am a polite person and sometimes the best management canno change matters when the odds or the owners or both are against them.

True, so why on earth would EY buy into AB? Starting and growing an airline is relatively easy, especially with the full backing of the government, but running an airline and/or turning one around, as in AB? Night and day.

lightsaber · Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:28 pm

Quoting aloges (Reply 25):
*sigh*

Are they growing in market share? My perception is that while the alliance airlines might be growing, more of the aviation growth is going on non-aligned carriers.

Alliances won't go way tomorrow. But more and more code shares are being done out of alliance. I do not see that trend slowing. In fact, that is the growth trend.

Lightsaber

PanHAM · Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:39 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 23):
They will just now have more AF feed. Win-win.

where to? AF is feeding their long haul services from German province cities, as does KLM and both do that since the eraly 50s.. Where can AF feed AB?

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 23):
Why is there any writing off? AB is still in OW

well, that's what the bold print in the headline of Sueddeutsche says. "EY Hogan is pushing AB into an alliance with AF".

That means, they have to get out of OW

Now, in the course of this zthread we have come to the conclusion that the journalist is not such an expert and may be he meant "code-share".

Fine, but it has to be clarified.

aloges · Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:39 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 27):

OK, here we go again: you were implying that I had "accused" (for lack of a better term in my vocabulary) someone of mentioning the dissolution of an alliance:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 23):
No one mentioned an alliance dissolving.

To this, my reply was what I had said earlier:

Quoting aloges (Reply 11):
My point is that I don't see how alliances might be be a thing of the past if they're growing as opposed to shrinking. The dissolution of one would, on the other hand, support your point that they are.

The above post was still addressing this bold claim:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 3):
Alliance's are of the past... Airlines are now solely relying on establishing stand alone agreements with airlines which suit their needs...

In short: IMHO, the (start of the) dissolution of an airline alliance would certainly permit the conclusion that they are a thing of the past. A limited number of out-of-alliance codeshare agreements, however, does not permit it - because the alliances are still gaining members and also because such agreements have long since coexisted with the alliances.

Has that cleared it up?

jetlanta · Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:07 pm

http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...but-may-become-more-divisive-84303

Quote:
Global alliances have evolved from a first phase of marketing organisation to a second phase of anti-trust immunity and now are set to enter a third phase of contending and partnering with Middle East network carriers. The ramifications are complex and contradictory, out of which will be casualties along the way. As long as airlines tidy up loose ends, remaining focused on their individual strategy, outcomes can be stable. Carriers with already shaky standing – and there are plenty – will be encumbered.

The world is changing faster for airlines than at any other point in recent memory, and there is no better time for change than when the operating environment is as threatening as ever. Partnerships and alliances have been at the centre of that change, and after Qatar's ascension into oneworld, will only gain in prominence. It is an exciting world with new prospects, but also an environment possible to be left behind in. Following the status quo is not sufficient; it must be redefined.

lightsaber · Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:31 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 28):
where to?

AF would feed AB to eastern Europe. AB could feed AF to their much more substantial global network. win-win.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 28):
That means, they have to get out of OW

This assumption I disagree with. AF and SQ have significant code sharing without leaving their alliances. I see no reason AB would have to leave OW with what was posted. I see this as "Alliance as in partnership" not "Alliance as in Skyteam." Sort of like QF/EK. Or SQ and AF...

Quoting aloges (Reply 29):
A limited number of out-of-alliance codeshare agreements, however, does not permit it - because the alliances are still gaining members and also because such agreements have long since coexisted with the alliances.

We have two different perspectives on this. While alliances grow, I see the number of side codeshares and non-alligned growing in market share. LCCs, EK, Virgin, and other non-aligned airlines.

The benefit of OW, *A, and Skyteam is a 'pre-packaged' set cooperation. If that is bypassed through Alliances between airlines or non-compliance, then I see it strongly weakening OW, *A, Skyteam.

Anyway, I would see an AB/AF code-share (or 'alliance') as benefiting both tremendously. That is what matters.

Lightsaber

EK413 · Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:47 am

Quoting aloges (Reply 29):
In short: IMHO, the (start of the) dissolution of an airline alliance would certainly permit the conclusion that they are a thing of the past. A limited number of out-of-alliance codeshare agreements, however, does not permit it - because the alliances are still gaining members and also because such agreements have long since coexisted with the alliances.
Has that cleared it up?

I don't need it explained and the point I was making is the fact airlines nowadays explore other avenues and align their operations with non alliance carriers prior to signing up with the big 3 OW, Star, Sky... Yes I stated alliances are of the past and I "quote" I never stated they are desolving its certainly fair to say airlines don't solely rely on them... We have QF/CX as a perfect example which drove QFs decisions to explore outside Oneworld Alliance for a partner and jumped into bed with EK...

Quoting aloges (Reply 11):
As for the planet issue, I'm from the third rock from the sun. And you?

I'm from the fourth rock from the sun explaining the delay with my responses...

Quoting heebeegb (Reply 30):

Oh dear.........

If you plan on commenting please add value to the discussion... I'm surprised the moderators didn't delete your comment...

EK413

aloges · Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:19 am

Quoting EK413 (Reply 33):
I don't need it explained

Excellent, I wasn't addressing you anyway.

Quoting EK413 (Reply 33):
I never stated they are desolving

Even better, nobody said that you had. And now, back to the topic.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 32):
We have two different perspectives on this.

Not necessarily, I was a bit caught up in replying to other aspects of this thread.

I do agree that a tie-up like QF+EK weakens any alliance, but I cannot imagine that they will lose their usefulness over such agreements. There are far too many airlines in the world to make one-on-one negotiations between all of them viable - for instance, LOT and TAM wouldn't have a lot to gain from such an effort, but through the Star Aliiance, they can still cooperate. Unless the consolidation à la Lufthansa Group, Air France-KLM and IAG continues until no relevant small partners are left, I don't see how individual agreements could be more efficient than the alliances in a majority of cases.

danielkandi · Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:47 am

Quoting goldorak (Reply 1):

A good example would be Aeroflot and SAS. I recall having bought a ticket online, where there was an SK codeshare between them and the russian carrier, with Flot flying it. and they are skyteam vs staralliance right ?

SCQ83 · Fri Oct 05, 2012 2:12 am

When was the last time a carrier moved from one alliance to another?

I can't see the problem with AB moving from Oneworld to SkyTeam.

To me, it looks like AB adds very little to OW... and vice versa. I have always thought that OW just picked AB because they wanted someone located in the core of Europe (being the other members in the UK, Spain, Finland, Russia and - RIP - Hungary which all are somehow peripheral to BE/NL/DE/CH/FR... and for that reason they are of little use for intra-European connections), and AB just wanted to go into an alliance to better confront LH.

If QR goes into Oneworld... it would be certainly awkward to have AB, a "de facto" subsidiary of Etihad (which at that stage will be much eager to join SkyTeam) in the same alliance as the Qataris, which probably is EY's largest contender (keep EK in a different league).

I even see AB a more logical fit in SkyTeam that in Oneworld... they could cooperate with AFKL for American/Western African connections, Etihad for Asian/Eastern African and Aeroflot for Russia/CIS.

greenwichsud · Fri Oct 05, 2012 2:58 am

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 31):

http://centreforaviation.com/analysi...but-may-become-more-divisive-84303

Interesting artcicle. Thanks for sharing.

IMHO if there's anything that I can see eventually falling out of favor, it's the joint ventures. Specifically, they will die at the hands of the carriers that are more nimble and don't want to always share revenue on certain routes that the joint venture partner could never contribute to on their own.

MaverickM11 · Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:15 am

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 36):
When was the last time a carrier moved from one alliance to another?

Probably CO from Skyteam to Star. Or MX from Star to oneworld. So it could go either way

lightsaber · Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:05 am

Quoting EK413 (Reply 33):
We have QF/CX as a perfect example which drove QFs decisions to explore outside Oneworld Alliance for a partner and jumped into bed with EK..

Exactly.

Quoting aloges (Reply 34):
There are far too many airlines in the world to make one-on-one negotiations between all of them viable - for instance, LOT and TAM wouldn't have a lot to gain from such an effort, but through the Star Aliiance, they can still cooperate.

You have a good point there. However, How much will they cooperate? There is UA/LH levels of cooperation and then QF/CX levels within the alliances.

So if you're suggesting alliances will continue, but instead of becoming tighter alliances a more loose network... Okay. Then we can agree they will grow. But there has to be some mechanism to improve connectivity (I refer to CX/QF in particular) to keep their value high.

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 36):
When was the last time a carrier moved from one alliance to another?

Errr... Was it CO to *A? There was the failed attempt to pull JAL to Skyteam...

I personally think as alliances mature more and more airlines will switch.

Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 38):
Or MX from Star to oneworld.

Not exactly a mover and shaker anymore.

Quoting aloges (Reply 34):
I do agree that a tie-up like QF+EK weakens any alliance,

One side thought, this makes OneWorld unusually well positioned in the mid-East. If AA also ties up with EK, things will get interesting. However, I do not expect EK to do anything other than slow a little expansion to select destinations as part of their partnerships.

If AA and EK do partner, I expect DXB-MIA immanently. It could even be on AA metal!

Probably not, but it is a possibility...

Lightsaber

PanHAM · Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:53 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 32):
AF would feed AB to eastern Europe. AB could feed AF to their much more substantial global network. win-win.

AFKL does that from their own hubs non-stop. Why change at DUS or BER when those destinations are reached direct? Only exception may be VIE since routes to smaller cities in eastern Europe are viable from there, hence hat could connect.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 32):
This assumption I disagree with.t

My line is less an assumption but really a reflection on the headline n that daily newspaper. Now, we agreed all that this journalist is not a real expert of the topic.

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 36):
To me, it looks like AB adds very little to OW... and vice versa.

may be but still much more than it could add to AFKL.

Again, Gernmany is a backyard for AFKL which they serve extensively since 60 years and longer. They have their own feeder service and I really see little to nothing that AB could contribute here.

Not on cargo either, where they have an excellent affiliation with Leisure Cargo, which started as the cargo branch for LTU and is now a GSA for leisure airlines. That goes well with BA as they are not so much into cargo, but both AF and KL have a strong position on freight. Differemt story to keep something like Leisure independent in an alliance.

PanHAM · Fri Oct 05, 2012 7:33 am

Just adding - OW is "not pleased" already because AB feeds ther Asian traffic to EY at AUH. which really is not what the alliance stands for.

EX is certainly profiting from that, but again, what can AFKL benefit they don't have already? If they force to feed North Atlantic traffic to AFKL or DL at various gateways, that's the end for OW anyhow.

something · Fri Oct 05, 2012 8:15 am

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 40):
Just adding - OW is "not pleased" already because AB feeds ther Asian traffic to EY at AUH. which really is not what the alliance stands for.

EX is certainly profiting from that, but again, what can AFKL benefit they don't have already? If they force to feed North Atlantic traffic to AFKL or DL at various gateways, that's the end for OW anyhow.

Maybe Etihad wants AB flight numbers on AF flights to North and Central America, that they could then market as their own.

PanHAM · Fri Oct 05, 2012 8:29 am

AB offers North America. On own metal and via AA and BA. I really do not ee any advantage for AB with the AFKL set-up

SCQ83 · Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:59 am

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 42):
AB offers North America. On own metal and via AA and BA. I really do not ee any advantage for AB with the AFKL set-up

Own metal? AB does not even fly on its own metal to LHR or MAD, the two largest Oneworld hubs in Europe. BA would take you from Germany to the USA... not AB. I can't see much commitment from AB's side to OW.

AB flights to NA seem very leisure-orientated to me, so I wonder to what extent connections are so important... of all places, AB flies to Fort Myers, FL and Las Vegas, where AA connections are negliable if not zero. It looks like the AA gateways they fly to (JFK, MIA, ORD, LAX) are markets that they could make work on their own, without AA's help (sure a few connections on the top of that do not hurt). Moving to SkyTeam... no problem... they could still connect in JFK, and it wouldn't change much in LAX (both DL and AA fly to Hawaii, which I can think it is where they connect people to).

PanHAM · Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:46 pm

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 43):
Own metal? AB does not even fly on its own metal to LHR or MAD

Last time I checked AB had flights with their 333s to the USA. I call that "own metal". They even fly to MAD.

crAAzy · Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:12 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 38):
If AA and EK do partner, I expect DXB-MIA immanently. It could even be on AA metal! Probably not, but it is a possibility...

Dream on. We'll never see an AA plane anywhere near the Middle East in our lifetime for multiple reasons.

BTW - it's "imminently"

something · Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:22 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 44):
Last time I checked AB had flights with their 333s to the USA.

Slight correction but the A333 are all eco and only used on Hartz 4 routes like CGN-PMI etc. Their A332s go to Fort Myers, Miami, New York, Chicago (soon), San Francisco, Las Vegas, Los Angeles. MAD is served through their PMI hub, simply because IB has its own network of feeder flights out of Germany (not as comprehensively though as what AF/KL or BA are doing).

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 42):
AB offers North America. On own metal and via AA and BA. I really do not ee any advantage for AB with the AFKL set-up

I just checked today's AA flights out of LHR and interestingly, not one of them is codeshared with AB. They are all however codeshared with Gulf Air.

My thought was that maybe EY wants AB flight numbers on flights ex CDG, so that they can offer xxx-AUH-CDG-xxx. But I am really just trying to make any sense of this. Much like you, I don't see any actual advantages such a cooperation would have for anyone, other than the reduction of competition.

PanHAM · Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:41 pm

Quoting something (Reply 46):
Slight correction but the A333 are all eco and only used on Hartz 4 routes like CGN-PMI

U R right, but they use the 333s mainly from DUS IIRC , what was previsouly LTU L10 territory. I have been on one of these once , the 21h45 departure to PMI and the company I was working for then had their annual meeting there. but that was pre Hartz 4, long time ago. The bowling clubs special

The PMI hub is well known and that is one of the biggest assets which AB has in my opinion. It was a smart idea to set that up. But what can AB contribute to a European carrier? All have their own feeder flights from plenty German cities

It is only a value for long distance flights, if EY starts a daily flight into the PMI banks that would make sense, but where does that leave BA and other OW members?

.

jumpjets · Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:51 pm

Quoting SCQ83 (Reply 35):
I even see AB a more logical fit in SkyTeam that in Oneworld

I can see that if AB was not already in an alliance that a relationship with AF/KL/EY would have benefits for them but what I cant get clear in my head is what AF/Kl/EY bring to the party that IAG/AA and [if rumours prove true] QR don't already?

Delta777Jet · Fri Oct 05, 2012 7:33 pm

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 16):
EK can certainly send in their wish list for the next supervisory board meeting and we are discussing part of nthat list here, but they do not have a majority and due to the special rquirements in aviation will not have such a majority.

This is of course all right what you say from the theoretical point of view, but the reality is different and EY may have not that much officially to say, but everything what will be said will be followed by for example all the institutional investors etc. . because they want to go the success way and follow people who are doing this business successfully.

My personal opinion is that Air Berlin, AF and KL would do very good together. Imagine they would put the FF programs together. It would create a big problem for LH, because then AB would be offering nice domestic flights, European non stop city connections plus many connection possibilities via AMS, CDG and AUH and this all with a better product.

Lufthansa should be careful with all the changes to make the Miles & More program less valuable as this could hit back very soon when people really could start swapping to AB's Topbonus and start flying with KL, AF via AMS and CDG.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net