Guava

Hmm...this will be pitched against the *A team of AC/UA/LH/CO primarily, and you could throw BD/SK/LX/OS to the mix as well to cover more secondary TATL routes. I think with this coverage, *A will easily win hands down.

Aside from AF, I would never fly NW, not likely to touch DL if I have a choice and really indifferent towards KL. AF is the only carrier that is worth flying in the Skyteam group TATL. Quality wise, *A is just so much better, not to mention the much better coverage overall on both sides of the continents.

couscous

I agree with Guava that Star Alliance is THE alliance in terms of quality of airlines.. Skyteam doesn't come close..

JOUY31

Well, the 4 party JV is more than just an alliance, as its members benefit from anti trust immunity, so they have greater flexibility in coordinating routes and fares. In any case, I was just addressing the issue of the impact on CO's decision to move from SkyTeam to *Allance on the current balance of power, rather than the balance of power itself.

brunos

Agreed. The three alliances have gone in different directions.

- Skyteam will basically be the JV of 2 major merged airlines (AF/kl and DL/nw) with some peripheral regional airlines.

- *A is a loose alliance of huge number of airlines, big and small, very good and quite bad. some pairwise agreements (e.g. UA/CO). One advantage for FFP is that they get miles credit on a single program and can get elite status easily, but good-quality airlines in *A protect themselves by restricting lounge access. IMO it is becoming too big and heterogeneous to be of value to the FFP.

- OW is a small alliance of good-quality airlines (BA, JL, CX, QF) except AA. It is closest to the original business model of an alliance.

And that's for now; how they will evolve in a year time is unknown as there are periodic rumors of other airlines switching alliances.

Guava

Actually, you should know that AC/LH/UA currently enjoy the anti trust immunity already and that CO is applying to join them. In this sense, there is no difference between their status and that of Skyteam TATL operations.

I think CO fits AF's business model closer than NW and DL can because CO is a much better airline overall, not to mention, profitable. I view it as a loss that Skyteam can't keep CO. Why AF management went with DL/NW, I am not sure. Time will tell whether their decision is right or not. Perhaps they feel the size is an issue? Speaking as a customer, I will not fly DL/NW, period. NW has a nickname called North Worst and it's not without basis or reason.

Notice Skyteam is not gaining any new member but is in fact losing one. History tells us M&A rarely result in true synergies, would NW + DL proves the history wrong? I am not holding my breath. With that in mind, on paper, Skyteam seems to be weakened with the loss of CO if the NW + DL merger does not result in synergies or simply, the merger ends up being denied. In this sense, there is no doubt this will weaken Skyteam and Air France's position in the North American and European markets due to less thru traffic and possibly, less customers as well.

In my view, it looks like advantage Star Alliance right now.

Guava

Not too sure where you are getting this from because it is clearly false. The only major exception to lounge access within *A is the SQ's lounges in SIN and only in SIN. Aside from that, Star Alliance Gold have access to virutally every lounge in the *A network. On the contrary, it is Skyteam which is especially weak when it comes to Lounge access. *A Gold can be acheived by most mid-tiers within *A or the equivalent of FB Gold. But in Skyteam, that doesn't give you system wide lounge access across partners.

Although *A is big, you actually do not need to fly them all. A member residing in India is not obglied to fly Air New Zealand just as a French member does not need to fly Turkish Airlines if the member doesn't plan to go to Turkey. It is quite likely a member only deals with no more than 2~5 airline members for most of his/her travel. As for the heterogenous comment, again, I am at loss where you are coming from. There is no discord in terms of policy application. The rules that apply to the alliance as a whole is pretty uniform across the board.

I think you really need to catch up on your knowledge of *A as it contains a lot of false information or outdated knowledge. If you think anything I said is incorrect, please show me an example where "good airlines within *A protect thier lounge access" aside from the SIN exception for SQ, which has always been there ever since SQ first joined the alliance years ago. Like I said, that's the only one and only in SIN. Outside of SIN, you can take any SQ lounge so long as you are *G.

Not sure many people still call BA a quality airline these days, I certainly won't. There are so many trip reports out there, including a recent one where a member did a side by side comparsion against AF and the member said he actually need the booze to console himself because BA Club World was just too awful. AA is actually considered a good U.S. carrier, they actually spent the most money on food than most other U.S. carriers and their equipment, internationally, is well rated as well. OW is not what it used to be. JL is consistently ranked lower than its chief rival, NH, who is part of *A. CX and SQ are pretty much on par, depending on routes and other things. The quality advantage of OW has eroded significantly over the years due to the sinking of BA premium cabins and the super old QF First class seating that hasn't changed for ages.

JOUY31

You're right with respect to ATI. Would you have some data regarding the respective TATL marketshare ? (I haven't checked yet)

Well, AF/KL is currently ahead of the synergies planned at the time of the merger. But you're right, we can't tell yet for DL/NW.

tff

Another possible impact of CO (and CM) leaving ST might be on KL's AMS-PTY flight, in case it is dependent on CM's presence in the region (which seemed to be a factor when choosing PTY over SJO).

Mennix

Is CO leaving really a loss?

In terms of pacific coverage, yes. Everything else? NO!

I see it as a European who's main routes are into Asia ( CO not really present ) and into North America and flying mainly business class.

If you compare CO on the long haul system with AF/KL/NW/DL it is No. 4, only upfront DL. And DL will change to much better seating soon.

There are so many flights to NYC, that it is really no Problem, if there is CO or not.

Most interesting cities in US I can reach either directly from CDG or AMS, or with one stop and a short hop from one of DL/NW's hubs. So, the US domestic quality of the flights does not really bother me. All US carriers should rename their F(irst) into J(oke).

It was nice to have CO on board, and I really liked their CGN-EWR flight. But they never had been a really strong alliance member. For me it looked, like they wanted to stay as independent as possible. All over my Sky-Team time, I used a CO codeshare only once.

Once again. CO might be a nice airline. But since they announced the stop of CGN-EWR, there is nothing I will real miss if they go.

alexkov

From Israel the CO was the best ( Delta is present now, but CO is much better ) carrier to USA. I did at least 4-5 return trip per year on CO metal to EWR. That's a really bad news for me.

Doug_1970

Hi,

Does anyone know what the likely timescales for this happening are?

I've got two trips booked with CO from Birmingham. One to San Diego in August and one to Houston in October. I'll be gutted if they have left Sky Team when I fly, will make requalifying for plat more difficult too.

Doug

dechil

AF Travel agent says "end of 2008" before I buy a fly for September on CO.
So no pb for your flight status

keisari

Based on the continental website and FT comments, I suspect it will take at least one year for CO to leave Skyteam. I think that any flight in 2008 will be safe but anything in 2009 may be iffy.
I think you flights in August and in October are safe.