JerseySlime

I don't think anyone except a British Airways shareholder can think that BA dominance at LHR is anywhere equivalent to CO's dominance at EWR. BA flies three flights a day between EWR-LHR. CO can not fly any. Not does not, but can not. AF flies CDG-EWR. KLM flies AMS-EWR. CO flies EWR-CDG and EWR-AMS. Again, how many CO aircraft fly into LHR? Why do you think for years Branson put "NO Way BA/AA" on his aircraft? Because he had extra paint?

sobay_terp

The irony is the timing of CO's outrage so soon after the outrage directed at them by Onepass members in the last few weeks for playing unfair.

odnyc

Pardon me, but isn't BA the ABSOLUTE WORST airline for leisure travelers. I have flown them because I've had to several times and they treat economy passengers like dirt. Please correct me If I'm wrong- do they have the worst FF program of all, you need many thousands of miles for a paltry reward?

dbaker

haha

oh, wait, you were serious

notsosmart

jakob

what about the recent changes at onePASS ?
yes they aren't as drastic as BA's 25% on discount Y but you're gonna be getting only getting 50% elite miles and 0 segments. at least i can still earn 0.5 segment on AA if i fly on BA discount Y. lol


[This message has been edited by jakob (edited 10-16-2003).]

[This message has been edited by jakob (edited 10-16-2003).]

jakob

how convenient that UA/VS are left out !
both of them (even tho they aren't partners) would take the same stance against new entrants into LHR ex-US.
for Branson to show he's truly for competition, he should perhaps paint on his planes "No way Bermuda II".

BA is not what's legally keeping CO from serving CO. Bermuda II, negotiated between the 2 governments, is what you should be blaming on.
yes AA/BA/UA/VS all don't want it to change but it's not like the FAA/EU would do exactly as what those 4 say. US wants open skies between US & UK and EU wants cabotage rights within US. it's all part of a bargaining process. both sides need to give up something to get something they want and right now neither side wants to give in and agree to new terms on a new aviation agreement to replace Bermuda II.

would CO not object to BA flying domestic US routes ex-EWR ???

even if LHR is open to all US airlines and CO got the slots from UA, BA has only 40% of the slots at LHR. compare that to other airlines' share of slots at their own hub airports. compare that as i previously stated AF/KLM's 50+% at CDG/AMS.


[This message has been edited by jakob (edited 10-16-2003).]

[This message has been edited by jakob (edited 10-16-2003).]

Euroflyer

I'm outraged by all the outrage at Continental!!

Is CO copying Flyertalk posts for their press releases these days or what?! The wording on this press release sounds is so vivid - just change a few wordds and it could have been written by disgruntled Elites complaining about CO!

FWAAA

It's truly outrageous!

[This message has been edited by FWAAA (edited 10-16-2003).]

Kaeokai

You have got to be kidding here. You really think that revenue management is having problems keeping the low-yeild passangers off of the plane? Have you looked at the fare rules and fare buckets on an iternational (or domjestic for that matter) flight lately? If they chose to, rev mgmt could have a plane with only full Y and F seats for sale. I don't think there are many problems with a low-yield passenger taking a seat away from a full-fare flyer.

It's not the customers fault that the shop owner chooses to mark his product so low that he can't make a profit....

If you weren't serious in your posting, then please disregard...


K

RustyC

As an ATL-based OP gold about to head over to UA, I'd have to say that ATL, DFW and CHI flyers have gotten hit especially bad at EWR because of CO keeping those operations at terminal A. If you use EWR as a connecting hub it means not only a terminal connection, but another pass through security.

Post-9/11 they probably could have brought it all into C easily, but I got the feeling they were trying to protect gates at A from more AirTran or others like it. What was really bad is if you had to do a C-to-A connection to get back home and encountered a long line at security at A (as you had no alternates or elite special lines). Easy to see missing a plane under those circumstances.

According to USA Today, a number of airports are considering use-it-or-lose-it clauses for gate slots. Especially "fortress hubs"

Xyzzy

You would think CO could (or would) offer a terminal shuttle within the secure area...

bealine

I'm not going to defend BA management out of hand, cos they're as artful and devious a bunch of crooks as Gordo himself!

However, in BA's defence, it is one of the very few International carriers without a hub!

I work for BA at LGW and my wife for CO, also at LGW. Neither of us want to see BA take all its flights away from LGW (which it will do, given the chance) or CO take its operation to LHR.

Why? Do you really prefer the Third World slum of LHR? Have you seen T1 or T3 lately? (and don't kid yourself, T3 is where CO would end up!)

LGW is friendlier and actually more convenient for Central London and The City with the Gatwick Express and Thameslink connections - far better than the slow Tube or the Heathrow Express (who the hell wants to end up in Praed Street (Paddington?))

BearX220

I don't know what this LHR fetish is all about. Europe/longhaul connections are a nightmare. T1 and T3 are terrible places. Getting in and out of London is expensive and hellish. Meanwhile you can fly (anywhere)-AMS-LCY, have a far less traumatic connection at Schiphol, and breeze through LCY in about 90 seconds.

If CO had any brains they'd leave LHR to its misery and instead build up and market some kind of codeshare shutttle LCY/AMS or CDG. When you arrive through London City you can be drinking in the West End before you'd have gotten your bag back at Heathrow.

HobokenFlyer

FIC, you are a product of your environment; I bet there are no "riff-raff" citizens in Greenwich and I am sure you like it that way.

- HF