Qatar Airways nixes plan to buy 10% stake in American Airlines
#31
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: YYF/YLW
Programs: AA, DL, AS, VA, WS Silver
Posts: 5,956
The claim that AA cutting PHL-TLV was somehow tied to QR (the way this discussion resurfaced in this thread), makes no sense whatsoever. To make that claim, you need to make two completely unfounded assumptions:
- QR cares if AA flies PHL-TLV.
- QR has any ability to prevent AA from flying to TLV.
On 2, QR has no ownership stake in AA (the topic of this thread) and no joint venture with AA. They're just an arms-length partner through oneworld, not even any longer a codeshare partner. And even if QR did buy 10% or the maximum 25% of AA, they would be legally prohibited from having any control over AA decision-making under US law.
#32
Moderator: New York City and FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2007
Programs: AA PLT, Natl EC
Posts: 10,855
Folks, let's reign in the personal comments and focus on the Qatar Airways topic. Any discussion of the PHL-TLV route should be directed to the thread provided by ashill above:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/ameri...solidated.html
/Moderator
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/ameri...solidated.html
/Moderator
#33
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Boston, MA (BOS)
Programs: AA PLT Pro 2MM, DL Gold, UA Silver, Marriott Ambassador + LT Plat, COFC Venture X, HHonors Diamond
Posts: 5,587
QR should go awAAy and stAAy awAAy...they have enough issues on the home front; besides isn't Akbar's time better spent publicly shamming suppliers in a confrontational manner?
#34
Join Date: Sep 2015
Programs: UA Million Mile, Mileage Plus Premier 1K, SkyMiles Gold Medallion, AAdvantage Gold
Posts: 875
Back to the topic of the thread... I think QR realized there was no chance of improving ties with AA and that their proposed investment only made their existing relationship worse. AA wants to keep their employees happy and all of the unions hate the ME3, so Parker's popularity among employees went up after he openly commented on their proposed investment and scaled back ties with EY and QR.
#35
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: FIND ME ON TWITTER FOR THE LATEST
Posts: 27,730
I heard the profitability thing was a load of garbage. Apparently, AA had some dispute with some employees or former employees in Israel from when they flew JFK-TLV (inherited from TWA, later cancelled for apparently the same reason). So it was cheaper and easier for AA to cancel the flight right after acquiring US instead of going through a potentially expensive legal battle in Israel.
#37
Join Date: Aug 2004
Programs: AA (EP), Hilton (Diamond), Marriott Bonvoy (Titanium)
Posts: 8,937
I'm done, but remain very skeptical that Israel was dropped solely because PHL-TLV wasn't profitable (enough). I believe that AA (Parker) just decided that AA couldn't compete in the U.S. - Israel market (from any Hub) and ceded it to UA and DL and on a different level, ELAL.
As for QR dropping their intent to purchase a stake in AA, do we know why they wanted to do so in the first place? Given the fight between the Middle East Three and U.S. carriers, the idea that QR wanted to invest somewhere that would improve their relationship with U.S. airlines and generate return seems reasonable. There seems to be a pattern with the Middle East Three of forming partnerships by investing in other countries' airlines.
Last edited by anabolism; Aug 6, 2017 at 1:25 pm Reason: Fix typo ("IW" instead of "W").
#38
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: LHR, HKG
Programs: gate lice
Posts: 315
I heard the profitability thing was a load of garbage. Apparently, AA had some dispute with some employees or former employees in Israel from when they flew JFK-TLV (inherited from TWA, later cancelled for apparently the same reason). So it was cheaper and easier for AA to cancel the flight right after acquiring US instead of going through a potentially expensive legal battle in Israel.
Back to the topic of the thread... I think QR realized there was no chance of improving ties with AA and that their proposed investment only made their existing relationship worse. AA wants to keep their employees happy and all of the unions hate the ME3, so Parker's popularity among employees went up after he openly commented on their proposed investment and scaled back ties with EY and QR.
Back to the topic of the thread... I think QR realized there was no chance of improving ties with AA and that their proposed investment only made their existing relationship worse. AA wants to keep their employees happy and all of the unions hate the ME3, so Parker's popularity among employees went up after he openly commented on their proposed investment and scaled back ties with EY and QR.
AA and QR's relationship is already pretty bad, but neither of them can afford to leave oneworld. You don't have to like someone to work with them.