Alcazar
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: below sea-level . . . (and on page 32).
Age: 56
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alcazar
10 years ago the Alcazar project didn't happen.
I thought coz KLM didn't want to let go of NorthWest and Swissair stayed with partner Delta Airlines.
Now that the former KLM chairman seems to become boss of the newly formed Swiss National Airline rumours are flying that the project might be resurrected. Probably in a slightly different form. Is this something both sides want ? Is the idea of forming a fourth large European Airline (maybe with more partners) a feasible one ?
I thought coz KLM didn't want to let go of NorthWest and Swissair stayed with partner Delta Airlines.
Now that the former KLM chairman seems to become boss of the newly formed Swiss National Airline rumours are flying that the project might be resurrected. Probably in a slightly different form. Is this something both sides want ? Is the idea of forming a fourth large European Airline (maybe with more partners) a feasible one ?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tis true the Alcazar did bomb because (at the time) KLM and NW were so heavily linked, and SR didn't want to give up DL.While there were smaller issues as well, that was the big (well publicized) issue. Now that SR/Crossair isn't tied up with anyone (who would want to be?) these guys are looking for a White Knight. Granted, KLM appeared as such to AZ last year, but they've got their bottom line to think about as well. And who the heck in their right mind would want to attach themselves to an airline that continuously loses money? Sure, SR has a name/reputation, but that pretty much got tanked over this past year, as well. KLM is looking for a partner, and the dance floor is getting pretty empty. Since Mr. Bouw left not on the best note from KLM, it may be the case that the big boys at KL wouldn't take too kindly to his solicitation. However, if LH and AF start to push them (KL) too hard against the wall, SR may start looking better.
Here's the situation:
1. KL's CEO (Leo van Wyck) has said over and over again they are seeking to hook up with another carrier in Europe. Given their current route structure, they should do it.
2. SR (or whatever its new name is going to be) needs to do something to polish up the name, and help out with their finances. Naturally, Mr. Bouw would think first of KL as they have so obviously advertised that they desire a link with a European carrier. However, a lot of work needs to be done before SR can get itself out of the hole that's been dug. While KL may not have stellar service, it continues to plug along, doing its business and staying afloat. Plus he'd probably get NW in the bargain. (Two for the price of one, so to speak).
3. KL has a 10 year (very strong) alliance agreement with NW. They're not going to do anything to end it before its time (if I remember correctly that'll be in 2008 or thereabouts). If NW doesn't think this link is good, they won't go in on the deal, and SR won't be getting as good of a bargain as they thought.
In my opinion, if I were taking the decision, I'd wait at least a year on SR, to see how things go, before I'd jump in on the deal. I think it'd be very foolish for KL to link up with them now. I certainly don't think it'd help their reputation.
Here's the situation:
1. KL's CEO (Leo van Wyck) has said over and over again they are seeking to hook up with another carrier in Europe. Given their current route structure, they should do it.
2. SR (or whatever its new name is going to be) needs to do something to polish up the name, and help out with their finances. Naturally, Mr. Bouw would think first of KL as they have so obviously advertised that they desire a link with a European carrier. However, a lot of work needs to be done before SR can get itself out of the hole that's been dug. While KL may not have stellar service, it continues to plug along, doing its business and staying afloat. Plus he'd probably get NW in the bargain. (Two for the price of one, so to speak).
3. KL has a 10 year (very strong) alliance agreement with NW. They're not going to do anything to end it before its time (if I remember correctly that'll be in 2008 or thereabouts). If NW doesn't think this link is good, they won't go in on the deal, and SR won't be getting as good of a bargain as they thought.
In my opinion, if I were taking the decision, I'd wait at least a year on SR, to see how things go, before I'd jump in on the deal. I think it'd be very foolish for KL to link up with them now. I certainly don't think it'd help their reputation.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes indeed, wait for the dust to settle, no sense to pay thru the nose when assets can be had much cheaper....later on. OTOH, don't wait TOO long as others will see value...such as it is. As wise men have said before....better to buy when blood is in the streets.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Confederatio Helvetica
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cloggie, speculations based on fantassy are never very useful.
A few facts.
1. Swissair is dead. It longer exists. There is no hole to dig itself out of, no finances to polish up, it's finished, kaput, caktus-fondaktus, all over-red rover, karked, expired, foxtrotted, Sabena'd, finito. Got it?
2. Buow's appointment to the Crossair board has not been approved and is unlikely to be.
3. KLM is gravitating toward One World (had a close look at the Northwest books lately........yuk!)
4. Crossair has already had extensive discussions with AA about their own membership of Oneworld.
The present situation is about consolidation. Establishing small alliances among companies of dubious financial record is a stategy which has failed spectacularly.
A few facts.
1. Swissair is dead. It longer exists. There is no hole to dig itself out of, no finances to polish up, it's finished, kaput, caktus-fondaktus, all over-red rover, karked, expired, foxtrotted, Sabena'd, finito. Got it?
2. Buow's appointment to the Crossair board has not been approved and is unlikely to be.
3. KLM is gravitating toward One World (had a close look at the Northwest books lately........yuk!)
4. Crossair has already had extensive discussions with AA about their own membership of Oneworld.
The present situation is about consolidation. Establishing small alliances among companies of dubious financial record is a stategy which has failed spectacularly.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saffa --
You have to look at Continental's books. Of the two girlfriends (NW and CO), they're the looker of the pair. KLM just tied a codeshare arrangement with Continental which I don't think they're interested in dissolving.
And frankly, a OneWorld with BA and KLM in it raises too many antitrust questions on both sides of the Pond.
You have to look at Continental's books. Of the two girlfriends (NW and CO), they're the looker of the pair. KLM just tied a codeshare arrangement with Continental which I don't think they're interested in dissolving.
And frankly, a OneWorld with BA and KLM in it raises too many antitrust questions on both sides of the Pond.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: below sea-level . . . (and on page 32).
Age: 56
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've heard Alitalia is not happy with Air France.
Northwest and Alitalia still codeshare.
Northwest - Continental - KLM - Alitalia - Swissair - (+ maybe Austrian) - Malaysian - JAL-JAS ??
BA and KLM have tried 387 times now.
Doesn't seem possible.
BA - AA is not all that sure either.
Interesting dilemma's and options.
Northwest and Alitalia still codeshare.
Northwest - Continental - KLM - Alitalia - Swissair - (+ maybe Austrian) - Malaysian - JAL-JAS ??
BA and KLM have tried 387 times now.
Doesn't seem possible.
BA - AA is not all that sure either.
Interesting dilemma's and options.
