Originally Posted by
anat0l
So I'm supporting the view of J-Class: and it's not just safety, it's reliability and the fact that there are a sizable number of codeshares out there where the whole cross-airline customer service thing is a complete mess. You also have some really messy codeshares like full cost carriers codesharing on a flight operated by a low cost carrier. Now how can you honestly say that some carriers who participate in codeshares are honestly thinking about their reputation (of which safety is one factor of it) rather than their bottom line, which is the real reason why codeshares exist?
Unless I misread it the thrust of
J-Class's post was that he could end up on an airline "I'm not ecstatic about travelling on from a safety perspective".
So leaving aside the raft of new issues you've raised and focussing on safety: unless your example is meant to suggest that AF is an airline with inherently weak safety standards that QF never would have codeshared with if they weren't greedy, I fail to see how you are supporting his view?
Yet by your own admission this was a one-off accident for AF that QF never could have anticipated. So the logic still eludes me.
If anything your example shows why airlines
would be thinking about their reputation because if things go wrong they, like QF in this case, will be on the line both in public perception and in law. In which case you appear to be supporting my point.