quemalo

I think it'll be either AM or AF/KL. Maybe both at once.

quemalo

AM it is

rustykettel

Wow. Sorry everyone, I forgot to knock on wood!

I was thinking about it in terms of DL now owning 49% along with their combined MX-US operations agreement and AS starting service to more and more Mexican destinations. Actually kind of shocked that it happened this quickly.

rustykettel

Tongue firmly in cheek
6) QX

jiburi

I agree. DL has filled-in most of the holes it had along the west coast. KL/AF/AM and possibly even KE no longer needs AS.

B6 comes to mind, with a stock swap of sort, but both B6 and AS have to smooth over their past dealings.

AA?
AA still has holes along West Coast. It makes sense AA is still a semi-partner.

Jiburi

channa

B6 and AS should be able to work out some sort of selective codeshare arrangement. B6 could use the AS PNW and Hawaii stuff, and AS could use the NE connections out of JFK/BOS and the Caribbean network.

radiowell

Continuing with this point, geographically, KE makes even more sense and persuasive argument, with respect to DL's west coast presence and the need (or lack there of) for AS.

davistev

JetBlue please. That would be a complimentary fit as they have a strong presence on the East Coast. JetBlue's other airline partners include Singapore Airlines, Icelandair and Emirates. Seems like a good fit to me.

sfozrhfco

B6 already has HA for Hawaii and the PNW outside of focus cities to SEA and PDX is just not that important to B6. B6 can also add more seasonal service to smaller cities through JetsuiteX which offers BZN service already.

PABE

How about Boutique Air (4B)? With the issues faced by PenAir, it would be nice to have a new ESA partner.

eponymous_coward

I have to agree. Transcon traffic flow outside of NYC-SFO/LAX is pretty small. The weak spot for BOTH airlines is the middle of the country off the coasts, and a hookup doesn't really help with that. US execs could tell you that a dumbbell shaped network doesn't do a lot for you.

As it stands, both B6 and AS will have to do what WN did: grow and serve markets through organic growth, not partners.

sfozrhfco

It really depends what is defined as a weakness. If adding flights to MiddleOfNowhereVille, USA is not going to be profitable, it is actually a strength that flights to those cities are not offered. Any company has to be strategic as to where they deploy assets to maximize profits and to serve those cities that are going to keep its best customers happy. Despite its small footprint in the West, B6 actually serves my needs just fine. I prefer a better/reasonably priced premium product when I go to or transit through JFK/BOS/FLL from California. Intra-West flights are not long so I don't care which carrier I use. AS/WN or even a legacy would be Ok. On the rare occasion I enter flyover territory, I will take whatever carrier offers the best value.

Does any one airline and their partners completely serve my needs? No, but I am fine with that.

As for organic growth, I only care about growth in city pairs I actually fly.

sdsearch

The other question that can be asked:

Does a thread like this make any difference to what the airline actually does?

tom911

Wondering if Hong Kong Airlines would be a good match, or whether it might alienate Cathay. Hong Kong Airlines starts LAX service in December and has committed to SFO next year. They started Vancouver service over the summer.
http://www.hongkongairlines.com/en_HK/homepage

jinglish

It's been brought up before, because HX is actually owned by HU... but yeah, not going to happen with the CX relationship.