Star Alliance or Oneworld
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Star Alliance or Oneworld
With the proposed tie up of Air New Zealand and QANTAS there seems to be an assumption around that NZ will leave the Star Alliance and join Oneworld.
I heard an interesting rumour yesterday (from a usually well informed source) that in fact QF will join the Star Alliance if this tie up goes ahead. When I thought some more, it made some sense and it would certainly stop SIA setting up in QF's back yard which would, I think be even more likely if there is a NZ/QF tie up.
Anyone else heard this?
I heard an interesting rumour yesterday (from a usually well informed source) that in fact QF will join the Star Alliance if this tie up goes ahead. When I thought some more, it made some sense and it would certainly stop SIA setting up in QF's back yard which would, I think be even more likely if there is a NZ/QF tie up.
Anyone else heard this?
Too mean to buy a long personal title
I have heard the rumour of QF leaving oneworld for Star on buying into NZ, but I personally think that the conventional "wisdom" is far more likely.
A number of reasons:-[list=1][*]The anticipated relationship with NZ will not be very deep. 25% of NZ will not get QF management control, and QF's previous experience with NZ (and with BA's part-ownership of QF) will probably have taught it that there will be limits even on the management influence it can expect to wield.[*]QF's oneworld relationships, in contrast, are extremely deep and strong. The BA/QF cooperation on the Kangaroo route is probably one of the most successful alliances ever, even if it is relatively limited in scope. But that ties QF into BA and oneworld in a very fundamental way. QF's relationship with AA is also deepening by the month. It also seems to be successful. There are major plans afoot, eg QF's gradual move into AA's T4 at LAX. QF would be tearing all or most of this up if it left for Star.[*]QF/NZ will have the lion's share of the money-making traffic within the Australia/New Zealand markets whichever alliance they belong to. Any venture by SQ in competition would be highly risky, given that QF and Virgin Blue have substantially segmented the market between them. Where would an SQ-backed carrier fit in, when it would get attacked from both ends of the market at once? Any such venture by SQ might be best advised to act substantially as a feeder for the major Star players who have destinations in Aus/NZ, but not be too much more ambitious than that. If so, there's no pressing need for QF to kill that competition before it's born.[/list=1] Of course, all this is idle speculation by a customer whose interest is merely seeing where it all might end up. We shall see.
A number of reasons:-[list=1][*]The anticipated relationship with NZ will not be very deep. 25% of NZ will not get QF management control, and QF's previous experience with NZ (and with BA's part-ownership of QF) will probably have taught it that there will be limits even on the management influence it can expect to wield.[*]QF's oneworld relationships, in contrast, are extremely deep and strong. The BA/QF cooperation on the Kangaroo route is probably one of the most successful alliances ever, even if it is relatively limited in scope. But that ties QF into BA and oneworld in a very fundamental way. QF's relationship with AA is also deepening by the month. It also seems to be successful. There are major plans afoot, eg QF's gradual move into AA's T4 at LAX. QF would be tearing all or most of this up if it left for Star.[*]QF/NZ will have the lion's share of the money-making traffic within the Australia/New Zealand markets whichever alliance they belong to. Any venture by SQ in competition would be highly risky, given that QF and Virgin Blue have substantially segmented the market between them. Where would an SQ-backed carrier fit in, when it would get attacked from both ends of the market at once? Any such venture by SQ might be best advised to act substantially as a feeder for the major Star players who have destinations in Aus/NZ, but not be too much more ambitious than that. If so, there's no pressing need for QF to kill that competition before it's born.[/list=1] Of course, all this is idle speculation by a customer whose interest is merely seeing where it all might end up. We shall see.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Middle East
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All of the above plus BA and QF are tied in shares of eachother! If it wasnt for ba forerunner Imperial Airways/BOAC QF would not be in existance! I seriously doubt this long relationship could ever collapse in favour of Star!
But I can be proven wrong!
But I can be proven wrong!
Too mean to buy a long personal title
"Double dipping"
The problem is the mental illness that will precipitate in the airlines.
What about a QF pax who is an AAdvantage member flying from HKG on a QF code. oneworld rules are that privileges are available if the flight is both marketed and operated by oneworld carriers. If NZ stayed in Star, then the pax could get into CX's lounge if the flight was operated by QF but not if the flight was operated by NZ.
And pity the poor ground and cabin crew who are already struggling to keep abreast of one alliance's benefits without having to learn two completely different sets of rules.
That's before you start looking at planning problems. If an NZ flight could be scheduled to connect well with a UA AKL-LAX or a QF AKL-LAX, which should be given preference?
It was interesting to see the press releases denying that NZ is imminently leaving Star. Not a hint that QF might leave oneworld.
What about a QF pax who is an AAdvantage member flying from HKG on a QF code. oneworld rules are that privileges are available if the flight is both marketed and operated by oneworld carriers. If NZ stayed in Star, then the pax could get into CX's lounge if the flight was operated by QF but not if the flight was operated by NZ.
And pity the poor ground and cabin crew who are already struggling to keep abreast of one alliance's benefits without having to learn two completely different sets of rules.
That's before you start looking at planning problems. If an NZ flight could be scheduled to connect well with a UA AKL-LAX or a QF AKL-LAX, which should be given preference?
It was interesting to see the press releases denying that NZ is imminently leaving Star. Not a hint that QF might leave oneworld.
