pbarnette

Except that, wouldn't the whole point of the JV that is being discussed be that you could avoid EWR altogether? My understanding of what they are seeking is a much broader code-sharing than you see with CO now, and that it would resemble NW/KL.

There would be no need to fly SFO-EWR-ZRH, when you could just fly BA (probably with the option of buying it as a CO ticket, if you wanted) the whole way, with only a connection at LHR. For those that live in one of the 15 or so BA cities without non-stop CO service to Europe would have a pretty similar number of 1-stop connections to Europe as they have now.

supermasterphil

I am sorry, got it mixed up with their nonstop service to LAX.

Anyway, there are still better possibilities than doing TWO connections!

CO 1E

You're not alone - I am not overly excited about an alliance with OW, mainly because of the poor partner EQM earning potential.

ContinentalFan

LAX isn't a bad flight. I was surprised when I discovered that there was no flight to SFO. Of course other options are LH through MUC.

SkyBuck

SFO-ZRH requires at least one connection on any carrier ("just" flying BA with "only" a connection at LHR implies that it's somehow superior to a connection at EWR, which many would disagree with). CO offers EWR. Skyteam (excluding CO) offers ATL, AMS, CDG. OW (excluding CO) offers JFK or LHR. Since both endpoints are *A hubs, it makes sense that they would have the widest range of connecting cities: LAX, ORD, IAD, PHL, JFK, BOS, YYZ, FRA, MUC.

pbarnette

Actually, the post was a specific response to someone speaking of having to take a double-connection that would not be required under the new arrangement, even if going via EWR were, for some reason, not an option.

The wider point is that, a true JV would mean no decrease in one-stop options using a CO code (and presumably the EQMs, etc that might mean) for those living outside of EWR. Indeed, it should only increase them.

Considering that *A has more than their share of partial credit fares, I'm not sure that the options for full earning aren't endangered generally. ST is already the most generous for partner earnings, so any non-ST option for CO would be a negative on that front.

FWAAA

Well, LHR appears very important for CO, OneWorld membership or not, given that CO is rumoured to have spent over $200 million to acquire three slot pairs at LHR.

Sure, there are better hubs in the world, but there aren't a lot of them where you can connect to numerous BA long-haul flights.

vsevolod4

I've always advocated having top-tier membership in all 3 alliances; that turns the tables back against the airlines and preserves full freedom of choice world-wide.

The most awkward thing about OW is the regulatory-driven TATL exclusions for BA and AA members on their counterpart's flights. Certainly not "seamless." And mileage earning and status earning on BA sucks unless you're flying premium fares, and you get shafted on elite bonus RDMs on many partner fares. ST has the best reciprocity and consistency; earning miles, earning EQMs, earning bonus RDMs, etc., has fewer "exceptions" than either *A or OW.

*A is the best alliance in terms of breadth of coverage, with strengths across more places. ST is weak in Asia, where it only has KE, some regional Chinese and some ex-NRT NW flights. OW is weak on mainland Europe flights unless you use LON or HEL as a hub. And OW rocks in OZ, and *A has ANZ, and ST is a nonentity there.

An AA alliance would probably spin CO out of ST, which would weaken but not kill ST. And it would strengthen OW.

Cofyknsult

REGULATORY ???
Would you also say "Regulatory" for the mutual exclusion of AA / Jet Airways flights and mileage accrual between New York and Brussels ?

supermasterphil

I think it has even be confirmed that they paid $209 million for the LHR slots. What a mistake!

vsevolod4

Yes, regulatory; anti-trust issues in the case of AA and BA. Regulators currently restrict AA and BA from full mutual cooperation, with the hang-up being the TATL part. AA and BA have twice sought and denied antitrust immunity (in 1997 and 2001), but were denied. Regulators told the pair that the anti-trust issues would be resolved only if the two airlines sold off some of their very expensive landing slots at LHR. Apparently, earning miles on each other's TATL flights would have been one step too close for regulators.

And yeah, TATL includes NYC-BRU.

With Open Skies and CO and others beginning to get slots at LHR, perhaps the regulatory environment will become less of an issue.

We only hope. Until then, some of us have to maintain both AA and BA memberships.

graraps

Regional Chinese? The largest airline in China is a member of Skyteam. It serves 50 million passengers annually, flying to 4 continents (basically everywhere apart from S. America).
Clearly, the above little provincial market fades into insignificance when compared to a network within the massive flyer base of 25m inhabitants that boasts Australia. Oh, and the seamless connections to New Zealand, a country which boasts a staggering population equivalent to maybe 70% of Bangkok's inhabitants.

ContinentalFan

I don't believe it includes flights to Canada. If you really like accumulating segments on AA, you could fly to JFK, then take a flight to BDA, switch to BA and fly to Gatwick! You earn miles on flights to/from Bermuda--exotic.

martin33

The current state of things is: BA-coded flights between the UK and US do not earn AA miles. All other BA TATL flights are AA-mileage eligible, including Canada, Bermuda, Mexico, Caribbean, and S America. The restriction on TATL flights was unilaterally loosened by the carriers a couple years back, in a successful partial test of the limits of "one step too close". All of AA's TATL codeshared segments (such as on Aer Lingus, and yes even on BA JFK-MAN) also do earn full AA miles when booked AA-coded. All codeshares, however, require specific government approvals.

cmdinnyc

I'm with you. A CO/UA deal would have worked out so much better for me personally, given location and flying patterns. AA/BA adds practically no value, given the lack of Asia connections which is where I usually earn the bulk of my miles. The limited EQMs on partners in OW is a weak point as well. The alliance may be great if you're a big $$$ flyer buying F and J tickets regularly, but it doesn't do much for someone who isn't.