1) Sorry the VS extended leg to SYD has gone, I was reckoning to use that in November!
2) ULH to PER: being able to do it technically and being able to do it at a price that folks will pay? But I agree, the cost of making it happen will probably be out gunned by the financial benefits of a making it two sectors, as detailed above by others.
3) For VS: They started as an independent at the right time but world events over took them. The consolidation into the alliances and the emergence of the mid-east carriers? Not much could have stood against that. If they had thrown in their lot with one of the big groups earlier? It might have worked, now it's a bit late. They will probably remain their current size.
4) The failure of Virgin group to link:
- V Atlantic
- V Austalia
- V America
- V Balloon trips
- V Holiday company
- V Cruise company
into a mini global group is astounding.
Having got three independent carriers with distinctive styles to NOT make a high level link up so that they could share pax and RTWs??? How did they miss that? They didn't have to merge, they could be their very own alliance with a small global co-ordinating centre. Heck, they even own a telecomms company to facilitiate the links with expertise and buying power! The others must be so relieved (and amused) that they failed.
I dare say that someone thought of it - but it is exactly the kind of brave step that the Virgin Group used to do. Take an established market and shake it up. The alliances have to shoe horn themselves under one brand - having first invented the 'OneWorld' etc. When Virgin already HAD a brand that was known around the world. Sheesh!
