Philippine Airlines: Good for Oneworld?
Sep 23, 2011 | 4:26 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: PHX/SFO/LAX
Programs: AA-EXP (1.7MM), BA-Slvr, HH-Diamond
Posts: 7,784
Philippine Airlines: Good for Oneworld?
I ran across this article while surfing for airline news. Would there be room for PR in OW?
Optimism at Philippine Airlines
PAL does not exclude also joining an alliance, most probably in a 2- to 3-year time frame. Oneworld could be one of the best options, as PAL enjoys a strong relation with Cathay Pacific, as well as Malaysia Airlines. The carriers network, with its extensive flights to North America and North Asia (especially to Japan), as well as Australia, could, in fact, fit very well into Oneworld's own global network. Flying to Munich could also create synergies with Air Berlin.
Sep 23, 2011 | 7:48 pm
#3
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: BOS
Programs: AA EXP/2MM, IHG Platinum, Marriott Silver
Posts: 1,199
PR would plug a few holes in OW. With MH joining the need for a SE Asia partner is diminished, but there may be room for both. As the article says, they'd be useful for another route to go Asia <-> Australia, but with CX/BA/QF/MH that's pretty well covered in OW. They'd also open up HNL and especially GUM to the rest of Asia - aside from JL via NRT once daily that is poorly timed for connections, there isn't much OW access to GUM.
As for recovering from earlier woes, stranger things have happened - GA has transformed themselves as a pretty respectable airline. Though I don't understand what the fixation is with star rankings. Does the airline industry really see Skytrax rankings as definitive or persuasive?
As for recovering from earlier woes, stranger things have happened - GA has transformed themselves as a pretty respectable airline. Though I don't understand what the fixation is with star rankings. Does the airline industry really see Skytrax rankings as definitive or persuasive?
Jul 16, 2012 | 3:13 am
#4
Suspended
Join Date: May 2009
Location: DFW
Programs: AAdvantage Platinum, Hilton HHonors Gold
Posts: 2,863
I have flown PAL in two distinct occasions recently (domestic segments) and I was positively impressed by the hard product as well as the soft product. Plus, they now feature the best pre-daparture safety video I have ever seen on any airline.
Like Garuda, they are improving (and expanding) fast, and if service/product is as good on the 777-300ER (which features lie flat beds) I would say they would fit OW pretty well.
Like Garuda, they are improving (and expanding) fast, and if service/product is as good on the 777-300ER (which features lie flat beds) I would say they would fit OW pretty well.
Jul 16, 2012 | 11:21 am
#5
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: England
Programs: Executive Club Silver
Posts: 711
With the San Miguel group purcahsing a large share of the airline there seems to be some large re-structuring going on, hopefully they are able to get the PAL house in order and improve profitability, network and quality.
I think PAL would be a good addition as they can create a more robust Asian presence. They wouldn't be a major OW member like BA or AA but could be a smaller, yet still useful, partner like RJ and S7.
Safety appears to be a major problem in the Phillipines with an EU ban and a Category 2 rating. I don't know how safe PAL is or not but it can restrict interlining and codesharing rendering them less useful. As an airline I think we should assume they are safe and it is just the Phillipine authorities who disregard the importance of safety, unless anyone can find proof stating otherwise.
I have never flown on them so will take people's word on the site about them being alright in terms of quality.
I think PAL would be a good addition as they can create a more robust Asian presence. They wouldn't be a major OW member like BA or AA but could be a smaller, yet still useful, partner like RJ and S7.
Safety appears to be a major problem in the Phillipines with an EU ban and a Category 2 rating. I don't know how safe PAL is or not but it can restrict interlining and codesharing rendering them less useful. As an airline I think we should assume they are safe and it is just the Phillipine authorities who disregard the importance of safety, unless anyone can find proof stating otherwise.
I have never flown on them so will take people's word on the site about them being alright in terms of quality.
Jul 17, 2012 | 3:14 am
#8
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,797
I do hope not. For me, in the face of the much larger Star Alliance, one of Oneworld's major selling points is that all airlines within are relatively large carriers with good safety records.
It would hugely devalue the alliance to have an airline that doesnt meet safety requirements of the 2 main aviation regulators.
It would hugely devalue the alliance to have an airline that doesnt meet safety requirements of the 2 main aviation regulators.
Jul 17, 2012 | 3:30 am
#9
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,657
I do hope not. For me, in the face of the much larger Star Alliance, one of Oneworld's major selling points is that all airlines within are relatively large carriers with good safety records.
It would hugely devalue the alliance to have an airline that doesnt meet safety requirements of the 2 main aviation regulators.
It would hugely devalue the alliance to have an airline that doesnt meet safety requirements of the 2 main aviation regulators.
Oct 10, 2012 | 7:27 am
#10
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1
I do hope not. For me, in the face of the much larger Star Alliance, one of Oneworld's major selling points is that all airlines within are relatively large carriers with good safety records.
It would hugely devalue the alliance to have an airline that doesnt meet safety requirements of the 2 main aviation regulators.
It would hugely devalue the alliance to have an airline that doesnt meet safety requirements of the 2 main aviation regulators.
Oct 10, 2012 | 8:00 am
#11
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,797
In 2013, OW could potentially have 5 of the 7 5-star airlines. Right now, Philippine Airlines just doesn't fit that image.
Oct 10, 2012 | 9:30 am
#13
Join Date: May 2010
Location: FSD
Programs: BAEC, Delta SkyPesos, VS FC, SQ KF, AA, HHonors
Posts: 1,884
Further, I cannot see CX, MH, UL, QF, or JL being thrilled with another competitor. It's getting crowded down there!
Oct 10, 2012 | 9:31 am
#14
Join Date: May 2009
Location: MAD/LAX/MNL/PIT
Programs: DL DM/1MM, PR, TG, UA, CX (Asia Miles), BT, AY, AA
Posts: 967
Uh, no. I in fact have respect for oneworld, and I like CX.
Let me quote myself from another thread why I will absolutely not support PR entering oneworld:
I will not allow CX to benefit from the PR-CX relationship, if it makes it to oneworld, at the expense of PR. If PR will join an alliance, I want it to be valued for what it is, not just to be treated like some lackey of a big-shot oneworld player (CX) and the Philippine market as merely a feeder for Hong Kong.
Let me quote myself from another thread why I will absolutely not support PR entering oneworld:
Not too confident on oneworld, as you can see in my signature. HKG is too close to MNL and will most likely eat market share away from CX as PR has major expansion in mind. Plus, I'm afraid that PR will be devalued in oneworld, as was the ultimate plan of CX when PR went bankrupt in 1998: if my memory serves me right, they wanted to acquire PR so it could be subsumed into CX, and were only unable to do so because of Philippine constitutional restrictions on foreign equity.
If ever, it has to be SkyTeam or Star. VN and GA are only in SkyTeam because they're important key markets which the alliance wants a piece of, and PR codeshares with both of them: the codeshare can be used to PR's advantage as it can more easily funnel Vietnamese and Indonesian passengers onto PR's trans-Pacific flights in an alliance setup.
As for Star, MNL is too far away from SIN or BKK to pose any real intra-alliance threat the way MNL and HKG could turn out if PR joins oneworld. PR also plans to open new service to FRA, YYZ and JFK/EWR in the future: important Star Alliance hubs.
(As far as I know, the previous management had favored oneworld, but I heard the new management favors SkyTeam. I can't be too sure about the latter, but the former is confirmable.)
If ever, it has to be SkyTeam or Star. VN and GA are only in SkyTeam because they're important key markets which the alliance wants a piece of, and PR codeshares with both of them: the codeshare can be used to PR's advantage as it can more easily funnel Vietnamese and Indonesian passengers onto PR's trans-Pacific flights in an alliance setup.
As for Star, MNL is too far away from SIN or BKK to pose any real intra-alliance threat the way MNL and HKG could turn out if PR joins oneworld. PR also plans to open new service to FRA, YYZ and JFK/EWR in the future: important Star Alliance hubs.
(As far as I know, the previous management had favored oneworld, but I heard the new management favors SkyTeam. I can't be too sure about the latter, but the former is confirmable.)
I don't hate oneworld per se: overall, the alliance has some strong members that I wouldn't mind flying again (CX, MA [RIP] and BA come into mind for me). What I don't like is an airline joining an alliance so that its role would be merely to feed the strong neighboring airline, rather than be given an incentive to induce organic growth.
The PR-CX relationship for me is contentious in this way: I'm afraid that if PR joins oneworld, CX will reap all the benefits of such a relationship to the detriment of PR (that is, if PR doesn't try to eat market share away from CX first when major expansion kicks in). If they've tried to do it before back when PR was in bankruptcy, what's there to say that they won't try it again?
The PR-CX relationship for me is contentious in this way: I'm afraid that if PR joins oneworld, CX will reap all the benefits of such a relationship to the detriment of PR (that is, if PR doesn't try to eat market share away from CX first when major expansion kicks in). If they've tried to do it before back when PR was in bankruptcy, what's there to say that they won't try it again?
Oct 10, 2012 | 10:07 am
#15
Join Date: Nov 2009
Programs: UA Mileage Plus: Premier Silver
Posts: 340
The EU and FAA bans are on the Philippine aviation sector as a whole, with Philippine Airlines being more the exception then the rule. That being said, I do agree that Philippine Airlines should improve their product should it truly wish to join oneworld.