JohnnyColombia

Sorry no, LAN Airlines (the Chilean one) has LA prefix and XXX flights. I did not mean to imply that those same numbers prefixed by LA 1, 2 or 3 would be the same as another LAN

HMO

You both are thinking like English speakers, not Spanish/Portuguese ones. We usually don't split the sound between a consonant & vowel.

The syllables are LA+TAM, not LAT+AM ^

sbm12

Correct. And in my experience throughout the day the company execs put the emphasis more on the second syllable than the first. :-:

aw

Couldn't they just keep both brands separately like AF/KL or BA/IB? Erasing the LAN brand seems like a travesty.

sbm12

They could, but the company believes that establishing a single, common travel experience and brand will attract more passengers and revenue than remaining split.

snufkin

As a French man, I'll take it as a compliment :-)
I was more putting the emphasis on the origin of the name, I am bad with languages, so I'll trust you for that.

aw

Yes sbm12, but at what price? As the 10th oldest operating airline in the world the name LAN carries a lot of history and reputation. It's a shame to see it disappear.

Marambio

That's interesting. LAN Argentina was 4xxx because of an old Argentine regulation which stated that the first digit of the flight number had to indicate the airline, for the purposes of clarity in ATC communications. AR is 1xxx, AU is 2xxx, LAPA was 3xxx, LAN Arg is 4xxx and Sol is 5xxx. For some reason Andes does not follow the rule. Maybe LAN decided to take advantage of this and make LAN Ecuador, Perú and Colombia follow the trend?

I talked to an acquaintance who was at the press conference the other day and after listening to how hot TAM's CEO is, he told me they don't plan to merge neither flight numbers nor their FFPs for the moment. As for the FFP, any change would have to be announced to members six months in advance, so don't expect anything at least until next year.

sbm12

About $30-40mm USD.

But does any of that drive revenues more than a new name will? I'm betting it does not. And the unified passenger experience might even manage to drive more.

That's an emotional challenge, not a financial one.

I have no skin in this game; I only first visited the region a few years ago and I have zero attachment to either brand. As an outsider looking in I can absolutely see the potential value in operating as a single brand. I think that's smart business. As to what that brand is, I honestly do not think it matters. People don't buy plane tickets because they like the logo on the outside of the plane.

Eastbay1K

It is also operationally important for staff to know what actual airline is operating a flight, and this makes things a whole lot easier. I believe that the non-4M (Argentina) LAN carriers wet lease planes between each other. They can also swap a flight without much issue, i.e., a canceled LIM/SCL LP flight can be replaced with a LIM/SCL LA flight. But a 4M flight cannot be replaced with anything (and the Argentine government currently won't even let them add aircraft to their fleet). If a 4M EZE/MIA goes mechanical, and there's an LA longhaul plane that is available, the airline has no rights to use it, or serve the route.

sdsearch

That answer seem in contradiction to each other. So which is it? Will LAN Argentina continue to exist as a name (even if only as an "operated by" (as you second post above suggests) or will it case to exist (as your first post above says).

Many flights already say stuff like "LAN operated by LAN Argentina". But since LAN Argetina's planes are different than LAN (Chile's) planes, I "ignore" the "LAN" marketing (which is what I presume will change) and think of "LAN Argentina" as my carrier, if I have look up seat charts or such.

So will a flight on 4M be "LATAM operated by LAN Argentina" or "LATAM operated by LATAM Argentina" or what?

Eastbay1K

Time will tell

Marambio

This is not only a matter of marketing (which can be quickly solved) but of national regulations. In the case of airlines, Argentina and Brazil require nationals of each country to own a certain percentage of the capital stock, and planes based in both countries need to carry local registrations (LV- and PP/PT-). Chile, Peru, Ecuador and Colombia don't have those requirements.

If you look at LAN Argentina, LAN Chile owns 49% of the company while the rest is owned by "Inversora Cordillera SA", a ghost-ish company incorporated in Buenos Aires in order to comply with this requirement. Brazil I believe is even more protective - I remember reading that 70% of the capital stock of Brazilian airlines had to be in Brazilian hands. That's the main reason behind this whole LATAM ordeal - LAN originally wanted to set up "LAN Brasil", and because they couldn't they went for merging with TAM.

From a lawyer perspective, I can see LAN Chile, Ecuador, Peru and Colombia merging into LATAM and TAM and LAN Argentina as two separate "brothers" of the holding. Then we might see "LATAM" flights (LA, LP, XL and 4C) and "LATAM opb JJ" and "LATAM opb 4M".

sbm12

And part of the plan with the rebranding is to remove as many of those differences as possible.

I believe it will be LATAM opb LAN Argentina but they will emphasize the LATAM part far more. That's what I was led to believe by the execs I spoke with.

The "contradiction" comes in the requirements between marketing efforts and the laws around operations and airline ownership which vary country to country. They are not trivial to overcome but also not impossible.

postular

Pan Am also has the emphasis on the second syllable. So whether you are saying Pa-Nam Or Pan-Am, the result is the same. Just as is La-Tam or Lat-Am.