suggestions to Oneworld
 

1. should Oneworld setup a mediator for fixing up some relationships among its members? like improving relationship among CX and QF, BA.
2. should Oneworld setup more OW joint lounges in some more locations, like NRT (JL Sakura), SIN (Qantas Club), HKG (CX The Wing/QF,BA the Hong Kong Lounge), JFK (BA Terrace).
3. also, can oneworld recruit members at a faster pace like the speed of recruiting members by *A?

1, Yes sure they will. They have one Japanese VP oversees the Asian operation and cooperation. But do not hope too much otherwise you will see many many discounted Y class ticket will give you 0.25 of the milages across the whole alliance just as what happened to SkyTeam.

2, Yes they will. But it would be difficult for HKG because HKg is CX's hub and there are capacity issue. BA/QF shares a lounge at this moment and maybe RJ and AY will be served by BA/QF lounge in future (I hope so)...JFK already host CX but there is rumors that BA may be moved to T8 with AA....

I would take 0.25 over nothing. Many CX discounted fares earn nothing on nothing on JAL and AA! :td:

JAL opts to use a 3rd party lounge at HKG instead of CX/QF ones...and they used to use the Eva lounge at LAX too...Doesn't sound like joint lounge is the most cost effective way in some cases...

1) Each airline already has 'oneworld coordinators' but the actual number of staff hired by oneworld alliance itself is very small compared to Star Alliance.

2) I highly doubt that a oneworld joint lounge will happen any time soon at one of the major OW hubs. For HKG, CX would much rather have its own lounge that it can control in terms of quality (own CX staff) as a premium carrier and can expand without prior consent of the other OW members in a joint lounge scenario.

oneworld has always stated that they preferred quality over quantity, and this shows in the current memberships of the OW vs Star. (Can't talk about SkyTeam, don't know enough about them).

Whilst Star certainly has some quality airlines (SQ, TG, NZ, for example) there are some real dodgy ones in there as well, which you would expect with an alliance comprising so many carriers.

OW on the other hand has a fairly high quality quotient. AA is certainly not THE best USA carrier (which is probably CO nationally, and AS within their own niche market) but it is up there, and certainly better than most of the opposition. The rest of OW (IB notwithstanding) are all top notch carriers, which serves to demonstrate that OW will not expand merely for the sake of expanding. They will do it if it enhances the alliance, while Star seems to want to expand at any cost.

I think OW should continue down the course they have set themselves, it seems to be working.

Dave

+1

I lived most of my life in a *A-dominated city, and I stuck with OW because it generally has the highest quality of all of the alliances. Adding too many airlines becomes cumbersome to the casual traveler, I think, and confusing. While many interline agreements in the *A work, many do not.

I like my smaller, better OW!

[QUOTE=thadocta;15157470The rest of OW (IB notwithstanding) are all top notch carriers.
[/QUOTE]

Actually I find IB just as good and in some respects better than BA metal these days - at least up front. Certainly a better J seat LH and better service in J intra-Europe. No difference in the attitude of the FAs now either.

I'd agree with that. I flew IB for the first time on a Europe trip last month and I was a bit surprised to find that intra Europe they were better than BA in pretty much every area (seat, service, food etc). Overall I found BA pretty rubbish flying J both short and long haul.

The biggest problems with OW have nothing to do with a specific route or region. Their problems lie at their core thinking, and its complacency, lack of aggression, and non-proactive thinking.

The JAL drama was a result of typical AA/BA complacency, and allowed DL to lay siege to a corner of the OW castle.

The "African Gap" is a prime example of their lack of aggression, and has allowed DL/Skyteam to make big inroads in the continent. I've never understood why BA/OW can't replicate the Comair model in Ghana and/or Kenya. Then there's AA's failure to take advantage of MIA as one of a the best locations for an African gateway in the US.

I would also point to LATAM, as a lack of proactive thinking. Any time a large percentage of an alliance member goes to market, red flags need to go up. As things stand now, LATAM could go either way as far as alliances. If OW were ahead of the game, they would have collaborated(within the law) to buy the shares of LA that were for sale previously to ensure more a greater chance of LA staying in OW.

If you fixed the first three problems mentioned, I'm sure we would see a much stronger and dominant alliance.

hhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Are you claiming that QF isn't safe? :td:
QF32 was a Rolls Royce problem, not a QF problem. Every other incident QF has had is something that happens to all airlines all the time. They only made the news because it was QF and the Australian press likes to bash QF. If the same thing happened on DJ/VA, the press wouldn't even blink.

Seriously? :rolleyes:

pppppppppppppppp