From the sound of today's conference call, F9 is not close to signing any FF alliances with other carriers. I found it interesting to hear BB state the pool to choose from was small and that a couple of players are currently distracted. Any thoughts on who the players are that he was referring to?

I also found it interesting that he felt losing the DL FF relationship was a real loss for the company, although the codeshare didn't produce much revenue for F9.

When you look at their latest quarterly results, it's clear that business travelers are driving a disproportionate share of F9's income gains. The uptake on Classic Plus fares is astonishing. But, if F9 is going to keep those biz travelers loyal, they have got to upgrade their FF program. Otherwise, they won't be able to differentiate themselves enough with other low-cost carriers.

I'm guessing United and American.

United obviously has its hands full getting its merger with Continental across the finish line and integrating the two carriers.

American seems pre-occupied with ATI and it's growing relationship with jetBlue.

I was told this past April from a pretty high ranking individual at the Republic that they were trying to pursue a codeshare/frequent flier partnership with American and possible entry as a regional member in the One World Alliance. That may still happen but the timing may have been pushed back due to everything else going on.

Frontier would compliment American's route network very well.

I agree.

Those of us with decent memory remember who the high ranking individual was. @:-)

A US Airways tie-up would be interesting too. Networks compliment each other nicely and US probably needs the help and we need access to the East Cosat. And don't forget Republic has their best and longest relationship with US Airways.

Quick Image:

Initially, I thought that the new Frontier would complement the DL route system well. DEN and MKE were points without major DL presence (I know NW has been on and off over the years with MKE, but in recent years it's been off) and I thought SkyTeam would want to leverage that. However, as we saw, DL must have been nervous about the proximity to SLC and MSP.

Now, with all the rumors about OneWorld, I would say that American would look at DEN and MKE and much like DL's analysis conclude that there isn't any difference between new Frontier and the ultimately redundant STL hub. I think AA would look at DEN and MKE as threats to their hubs at DFW and ORD.
As an AA flyer I'd like to see it, but from a practical standpoint I don't see it.

The idea of hooking up with US would seem to have much more potential by having much less overlap. But getting *A to agree to anything right now might be difficult with the UA/CO merger. B6 also offers an interesting hookup, with compatible fleets and non-duplicating routes. But they don't have the extensive international network that BB seems to want to hook up with.

That's the main issue with hooking-up with jetBlue or U.S. Airways. Neither carrier has a robust international network.

American seems to have no concerns with jetBlue's New York or Ft. lauderdale operations (which are key American markets and are much more of a threat than the DEN or MKE would be) so a partnership with Frontier is not out of the question.

Below is US's international presence, not that much, but remember that BB stated that he would like to fly to the Caribbean which US already does pretty well. One possible reason to go with US. Also they have some European flight, but no Asia (routes going west were to Hawaii). If Frontier and US were to hook up, it could really help US fill some of their international flights and possibly add some more. The hookup could also help Frontier and US shore up PHL, DCA, LGA and PHX from MKE and DEN.

I believe AA/OW is F9's best bet as far as a major alliance is concerned.

Given UA's existing presence in DEN, F9 offers very little out west for UA/CO. For that reason, a US partnership would be out of the question. US would not partner with F9 and bypass its far stronger alliance partner.

AA could probably better rationalize a partnership with F9. At least they would gain a regional network they currently dont have.

MKE is too close to ORD to bring any real value to either AA or UA.

I think a point to keep in mind is that even though BB has mentioned alliance membership, at this point a simple frequent flier partnership would probably be most beneficial. Codesharing would be a welcome addition down the line for the right partner but even the Delta partnership was lopsided. Their frequent fliers would probably be very happy to have access to international destinations to earn/redeem miles, whether or not they are on F9 metal for part of the trip or not.

I disagree! -- For the International Business Traveler Headquartered in Denver they will be UA/*A regardless.

BUT, for the MILWAUKEE based frequent business travelers, at least the ones I know they will prefer YX/F9 domestically and will FLY OUT OF ORD NON-STOP to Europe and Asia. (the risk of misconnecting TO the international flight is just too great when a 1-hour 15 min Limo, car ride will get you to a risk free non-stop flight).

These passengers are YX loyal and Either UA/LH/*A loyal OR AA/BA/ow loyal.

A tie up between F9 and either of these is huge! and will move a lot of international traffic from MKE to the chosen partner.

With the IAH/HOU move I assume that means UA/*A is NOT the partnership that is expected.

F9 is definitely differentiating through pricing though -- enough to make a lot of customers, business and leisure, stow FF strategy. I just bought my wife some $279 transcons into DCA for this fall. The cheapest competing offers that came with FF miles meaningful to us (*A or AS) were over $400. At that differential, miles do not matter in this dojo. At least not when my wife is flying.

I can't imagine UA supporting any incentive to fly alternative / cheaper competitor out of DEN. With AA so weak west of DFW/AUS, OW makes more sense.

Update on this from Bloomberg.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-1...r-airline.html

The best way to reduce pressure from a competitor would be to team up with them. If you can beat 'em, join 'em!

Additional article...

With the close ties that Republic has with US Airways, it would seem that they would work well together. What has stopped them from becoming partners sooner? If they even want to.

An interesting case would be if Frontier would code share with United, I think this was mentioned in one of the articles. United could pull down DEN a little and focus on their new hubs from CO.

Another interesting twist is if Delta decided to code share with Frontier since announcement of WN is buying FL may have changed some thoughts. Frontier will be able to compete against and put more pressure on WN in MKE. This was also the thought with AirTran but Delta didn't want to deal with Frontier.

If they code share with B6 then an agreement with American would happen as well, one would think anyway. How was the agreement between American and Midwest? How long did that last?

A lot of interesting circumstances and some which could become very beneficial to Frontier.