I know all too well how much of a mess this has become, this has been going on for over 60 years after all

What I don't get is why China still has a problem with Airlines in Europe (currently KLM only) in serving Taiwan under their own name (on the basis of the fact they are "symbols/arms of the state"), when they don't apply to American, Japanese, South East Asian, Korean and their own carriers (a fair number of which are state owned)

Remember the only nation that have diplomatic relations with the ROC in Europe is the Vatican, so I still don't get what Beijing has a problem with?

Would you mind telling me how to change my user name, I am not too sure

Here is the Revised list of what I put out earlier:

Brasília International Airport (Brasilia)

Comodoro Arturo Merino Benítez International Airport (Santiago)

El Dorado International Airport (Bogota)

Jorge Chávez International Airport (Lima)

José Joaquín de Olmedo International Airport (Guayaquil)

Mariscal Sucre International Airport (Quito)

Salvador-Deputado Luís Eduardo Magalhães International (Salvador)

Recife/Guararapes-Gilberto Freyre International Airport (Recife)

Salvador-Deputado Luís Eduardo Magalhães International (Salvador)

Salgado Filho International Airport (Porto Alegre)

Silvio Pettirossi International Airport (Asunción)

Tancredo Neves International Airport

It is, however, so difficult for us to understand why it is too sensitive for a UK carrier to serve there, when multiple US carriers, KLM, etc serve there, when there are 4 daily flights to Beijing and 8 to Shanghai from Taipei (plus many other mainland cities) by an equal balance of Taiwanese and mainland Chinese carriers, and when Cathay Pacific, owned 30% by mainland government-owned Chinese carrier Air China, mounts such a high density service between the two hubs.

It is difficult to understand without getting inside the Chinese mentatility. Yes KLM serve there but are the only European carrier to do so and I think I am correct do so as KLM Asia. The Americans have a different relationship with Taiwan to the rest of us, I have often myself referred to Taipei and the U.S. version of Hong Kong.
The fact is that the mainland government views inter straits flights as flights between two parts of China and remember it has taken many years for this situation to occur. Flights HK to Taiwan have always been frequent and whilst pre dates the return to the mainland where an unofficial way of connecting pre mainland flights.
The Beijing government would view the commencement of services by a flag carrier as a political move and that is why many airlines have shied away from offering direct flights.

There is a great demand for flights from China to Taiwan and v.v. maybe the other truth is there is not such a great demand from Europe.

Dude, what are you smoking?

Seriously?

and the benefit to IB of doing this would be??

Remember it is just IB that is affected by this, you have to look at this overall in terms of IAG/LATAM/OW, LATAM can have free regin on routes from their hubs to MAD and other European destinations, while BA can launch routes from LHR to LATAM hubs using IB slots at those airports (Latin America is poorlly served from the UK)

Or to prevent IB from cutting service to Latin America, maybe LATAM can agree with IAG that flights to and from LATAM hubs-LHR/LGW/MAD/BCN are to be served (for OW) BA/IB, in return LATAM gets to serve the rest of Europe from their hubs

Please register with another username. You most certainly don't speak for BA.

Would you mind telling me how I can do that?

British Airways (person not the airline) - Please re register under a different name.

What you are suggesting regarding co-operation to South America is illegal under competition law unless you have anti trust immunity.

You really don't want to get caught up in this.

For heavens sake, we get it that they are all international airports - no need to mention it against each airport. If they weren't international they wouldn't be served, would they?

Secondly, nobody (well ok, very few) knows it as "Comodoro Arturo Merino Benítez". I go0gled it and found out you meant Santiago, Chile (SCL) - why don't you just use that name?

I can work out Brasilia and Recife, but as for the rest - haven't a clue and can't be bothered to find out, as I doubt can many others, so it's unlikely to result in many positive responses.

As for the comment about your smoking habits, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, you are young and probably mean well, but you just come across as an idiot.

As to how to register as a different user name, well, you seem to have managed to register originally. Just re-register with a different name using the same procedure. In fact, (see Racedo's post below), you maybe would prefer no-one to see your posting history:p

Sent a message to CleeIB who posted the stickie at the top of this forum on anonymity as he/she should be able to help and means you don't lose your history. It avoids setting up a new account which could get flagged up as having 2 accounts if they use IP address software in relation to people having multiple accounts.

He wouldn't have had any history to lose if he'd taken the hint after making his second post:

instead of carrying on with another 60-odd posts posing as the World's Favourite Airline. :=

For heaven's sake, lay off a little - he'll learn without the finger waggling.

Maybe not the most erudite reply, but your ideas are fantastical! I don't want to deconstruct your entire post, but think about what BA could offer the smaller South American hubs (and Recife is tiny) that the largest Spanish carrier in Europe cannot? Not too much I would suggest.

Quote: “All of these are LATAM hubs, what I am suggesting that IAG and LATAM should agree that LATAM serves Mainland-Europe/Ireland from LATAM and BA serves those hubs from the UK, this would mean IB withdraws services from MAD to LATAM hubs (although it would still codeshare LATAM flights to MAD and if launched BCN)”

Why? It would be nice to have BA on these routes to/from LHR, as it’s very “light” on South America routes (just three), but why would LA/JJ and IB agree to this?

In particular, why would IB agree? Without South America, there’s not much IB longhaul left! For IB it would probably be the equivelant of BA abandoning North America!

Quote: “What I don't get is why China still has a problem with Airlines in Europe (currently KLM only) in serving Taiwan under their own name (on the basis of the fact they are "symbols/arms of the state"), when they don't apply to American, Japanese, South East Asian, Korean and their own carriers (a fair number of which are state owned)”

IIRC, BA’s TPE route was chopped in the downturn that followed the 11th September 2001. Could be wrong, but don’t think there’s anything political or diplomatic in this. Also don’t think the route will will return purely because transferring at HKG onto CX is so easy. As for TPE non-stops, could LHR slots be better deployed elsewhere?

So what ARE the "better elsewhere" routes for BA out of LHR, now they have all the BMI slots to play with ? To me it seems that all the good opportunities have in fact been adequately served for many years, and what is currently unserved is just on the margins. The best that can be said about the BMI purchase is that it has stopped OTHERS from getting slots.

Far East - I'm sure one or two additional destinations in China are being considered

When I was at the Customer Services desk in T5 First, a few days ago, a member of staff mentioned MEL, BNE and PER, not sure how much wishful thinking this was ?