Questions for official oneworld representative, oneworld4u
 

To make things easier for oneworld4uto help us all, I have set up this questions thread. Please only post direct questions here. All discussion will be removed to separate threads.

[Put in short para on how the process will best work, once this has been determined.]

The easier and more smoothly the process works, the more likely it will be retained and be of future benefit to more FTers.

Since FT respects individual's privacy, if your question requires personal information to answer please send a private message to oneworld4u <click here> rather than this thread. More general questions are welcomed here.

A reminder that checking FT is only a small part of oneworld4u's job and thus there will not always be an immediate response to this thread or to any private messages. This is especially the case when an investigation is required to answer a question - sometimes it can take a few weeks to gather the information.


Thanks for your patience.


Kiwi Flyer
OW moderator

Two questions regarding the oneworld Explorer fare:

1. Is a change to the 20 segment limit planned/imminent?

2. If the answer is yes, Will we be given advance notice?

These questions weigh heavily on the minds of many here when trying to plan ahead something as complex and expensive as a RTW trip. We have received unofficial "warnings" from airline employees, but as always with such rumours, it is hard to separate fact from fiction so any indication you are able to share with us will be, I am sure, of great benefit to all. Thanks in advance.

Questions copied from the welcome thread.

Thanks for your welcome and some initial response from oneworld4u
 

Greetings from FT’s new official oneworld representative, oneworld4u. Thanks for your warm welcome and for your support of and interest in what we like to think of as the world’s leading quality global airline alliance.

We’ve kept a close eye on FT for many years and have come to recognize FTers as some of the most insightful and knowledgeable folks in the industry. We appreciate your custom and your feedback.

Some of us have posted the odd comment here and there informally in the past, but this more formal arrangement will hopefully be more useful to all of us. We are looking forward to a long and mutually beneficial dialogue.

A number of you have asked what my role is at oneworld. Let’s maintain an air of intrigue by not being too specific (!), but I can confirm that I am a member of the alliance’s small central team, at what we call the oneworld Management Company (or oMC). This unit of around 20 people acts as the central secretariat for the alliance, based in Vancouver, BC, Canada. I’ve been part of this team for around five years after working for longer than I care to admit for one of the alliance’s member airlines.

I’ll be calling on my colleagues to help respond to some of the points you post, so they may from time-to-time appear on FT under the oneworld4u name, just to keep that intrigue alive and well.

As Kiwiflyer points out, responding this is just one of many, many tasks we have to perform, so please be patient if it takes us a few days to respond to points you post.

Please also understand that I/we will not be able to comment on some of the items – mainly rumour or speculation – that you post. Every business needs to maintain some commercial confidentiality, and we are sure that our competitors devour FT as hungrily as we do.

To answer some of your initial questions…

Viajero asked whether a change is planned to oneworld Explorer fare’s 20 sector limit. The simple answer to that is yes – and we believe all other RTW fares face the same issue. The reason is that the technological standard adopted by the airline industry (through IATA) for electronic tickets cannot handle tickets for more than 16 sectors. The industry moves fully into an era of electronic tickets only from June. Tickets already sold by then for journeys of 16 to 20 sectors would of course remain valid. We are working on a formal announcement now, and this should be posted soon. While Viajero and a number of other FTers may use Explorer for journeys of between 16 to 20 sectors, you are in a very very small minority. The new restriction will impact on a tiny percentage of customers. Even so, it’s a shame anyone should be impacted. Over time, as technology advances, we hope this industry-wide restriction will be eased.

Headintheclouds asked why oneworld airlines use three or more GDSs. First thing to point out is that seven of our ten members currently use, or are moving to, Amadeus. This means, we believe, that oneworld will have a higher proportion of our members on just one IT system than either of our competitors. Why not have them all on just one system? Mainly because oneworld’s philosophy is that, so long as they can deliver the oneworld proposition, our member airlines should be free to decide what is best for their own business. If it works for them, and enables them to deliver all oneworld’s services and benefits etc, why force them to go through a whole lot of expense and hassle involved in a change? We like to think that this approach to running our alliance is one factor why collectively our airlines have the best record of profitability over the past decade or so.

Headintheclouds also had a number of suggestions on how we display our PRF downloadable schedules. Thanks for those. We keep this kind of thing under constant review and I’ll ensure your observations are passed on to the team who looks after this.

Wandering-fred asked how far forward schedules are firmed up (slight paraphrase!) There are a number of factors that come into play here – commercial, financial, operational, industry, safety.... All airlines set their schedules in response to commercial demand and to deliver adequate financial returns. If either of those factors change, this may cause them to adapt their schedules, sometimes (rarely) at relatively short notice. To enable them to mount the programmes they want to fly, they obviously need not only the right aircraft, crews etc, but also things like runway slots, terminal access etc. Generally these sorts of things are firmed up at the two main IATA slot conferences run each year, for each “winter” and “summer” flying season. Most GDSs can handle flights for up to one year less one day ahead. Safety is a key factor for all oneworld airlines and if there is an issue that causes concern (such as security at an airport in a region suffering from unrest or a natural disaster) this can cause them to adapt schedules at relatively short notice. Rather a long and rambling response, but let’s put it like this – no oneworld airline would post a schedule it had no intention of flying, but these things are sometimes subject to change for a variety of reasons, as outlined above.

Until next time!

In the last year or so, the rules for xONEx's changed to include surface segments(/open jaws) in the 20 segment limit.

This has led to an issue regarding co-terminals where some oneworld member airlines consider the use of co-terminals to be a surface segment while others do not.

e.g. I know one airline considers the following route to be 6 segments, while another believes it to be 4 only:

• ORD-LHR,LGW-DBV-LGW,xLHR-SIN

Note, that while the first airline believes it to be six, they consider no UK APD is payable for DBV-LGA,xLHR-SIN.

Can you please shed some light on which interpretation is the correct one?

Many thanks for the response. The above suggests that the change is *solely* driven by ease of handling technological changes and with regret over reducing the product (for the small number of us who use >16 segments). Two follow-up questions if I may:
(a) how much weight is there in your alluding that were in the future the technological environment to change to make 20 segment e-tickets easy, xONEx products would once again allow 20 segments?
(b) Was there consideration to not changing the fare rules but just the ticketing constraints or otherwise finding a way to allow 20 segments on an xONEx where, say, a re-issue occurs after 4 segments have been flown.

Thanks oneworld4u. But I must correct you. It is headinclouds, not Headintheclouds. Two different members who are not at all alike.

So, who besides AA and CX are the lone holdouts from using Amadeus?

Question --- Award Availability Tool
 

Are there any plans to implement an awards availability tool acrosss OW partners.

I personally use the BA tool along with EF for AA.

An official OW tool to check award availability would be great.

Thanks for your input. ^

I have an issue with one subject as follows ...You know, I represent one part of those "Tiny Percentages" (no doubt also many more FT members as well) and it annoys me to be 'brushed off' like that.

In any case, why should mandated e-ticketing be an issue that restricts products to 16 segments at all? According to a well respected and very knowledgeable FT member who regularly posts on the FT oneworld forum, the answer is already technically available. See this post:

• Linked PNR's
  Quote:

  ---

  Originally Posted by number_6 (Post 8934731)

  IATA is mandating a very simple solution for the >16 segment problem: all IATA airlines must support linked PNRs by mid-2008. Many do now already; even AA has had this capability for years (but most Aagents are unfamiliar with it). The ticket can be arbitrarily long, split into 16 segment PNRs.

  ---

Moreover ...Given the above information and the fact there's only a 1 or 2 month hiatus between the IATA mandates regarding E-tickets and linked PNR's coming into effect, why even consider changing the rules to restrict to products 16 segments at all?

Adding to the question above it seems that e-tickets do not support open dated segments.

See this post.

How are people supposed to book tickets that include flights that have not yet posted to seasonal schedules and cannot be open dated?

Let me assure serfty that we are not intending to "brush off" anyone who uses oneworld services. We are in business to keep our customers satisfied. But we do have to work within industry-wide systems and standards. The shift to 16 segments for RTW fares is being imposed on the alliance by an industry-wide change. It is not something we have sought. If there was a practical way around this restriction, then we most certainly would have pursued it. As it is, our understanding is that all RTW fares will face the same issue.

Turning to serfy's earlier posting: "In the last year or so, the rules for xONEx's changed to include surface segments(/open jaws) in the 20 segment limit. This has led to an issue regarding co-terminals where some oneworld member airlines consider the use of co-terminals to be a surface segment while others do not. e.g. I know one airline considers the following route to be 6 segments, while another believes it to be 4 only:
ORD-LHR,LGW-DBV-LGW,xLHR-SIN
Note, that while the first airline believes it to be six, they consider no UK APD is payable for DBV-LGA,xLHR-SIN.
Can you please shed some light on which interpretation is the correct one?"

Our fares specialist advises: "Segments are the same as flight coupons. Which must have no geographical gaps. (Even between LHR and LGW). Thus LHR-LGW is a segment. In example you quoted, the only exception could be if the xLHR-STN has the same flight number as the DBV-LGA. In which case DBV-STN would count as one segment. UK APD is not charged for transfers (but is for stopovers). Transfers must be within 24 hours of previous flight arrival."

Let me add in response to manar that we would hope that, as technology progresses, the industry as a whole will be able to ease this restriction - look back at what airlines were able to offer just a few years ago and it is amazing how fast they change. But we are getting into the realms of crystal-ball-gazing now...

Beyond that, I would prefer to wait until we have posted our formal announcement on this issue before responding to any more queries or observation on this subject. So please hold fire until then!

On other matters....

headinclouds - apologies for adding a "the" to your name - and I hope the real headintheclouds did not take offence. Put it all down to being a newcomer....

777lover: Please be assured we do look regularly at how we can best support FFP members. I'm sure our competitors would love to know what plans we have in this area, so please forgive me for not responding to specifics...

And finally in this posting, a plug - five new destinations join the oneworld network in the new flying season starting this weekend. You can find full details and all the other latest news from the alliance in our latest news release, just posted at http://www.oneworld.com/ow/news/details?objectID=13247

Happy and safe flying!

That's interesting. Star Alliance RTW rules (currently) explicitly provide for various airport co-terminals to NOT be counted as a segment or transfer.

Thanks for responding so quickly oneworld4u ^

oneworld4u, Thankyou for your prompt reply. I note you made no reference to IATA mandating support for Linked PNR's by the middle of this year.

This implys that Linked PNR's are not being considered as a solution to the 16 segment e-ticket PNR issue even though the use will be "within industry-wide systems and standards"?

Why would this be the case?

I'm sure this has been discussed before but I'd appreciate it if you (oneworld4u) could clarify the co-terminal situation a bit more. I understand surface segments, but this LGW/LHR thing still confuses me based on past experience.

In September 2006 my paper ticketed DONE4 said GIB-LON-DXB-...-TYO-...-NYC-...-SFO-LON-GIB. It was a 20 segment ticket and while I arrived and left from the same airport in the first 3 instances, my last flights were SFO-LHR, LGW-GIB -- I would have tipped over to 21 if it hadn't said LON. Is it now explicit that city designations aren't allowed?

Excellent question. If we accept that LHR//LGW is a segment, and there is nothing the airlines can do about it, much to their regret, why don't the same airlines accept LON, which solves the problem?

oneworld4u, I would be happy to accept that LGW-LHR is a "segment", if the home carrier (BA) was willing to accept that they should provide a flight number so I can include it in my itinerary. Then most most OneWorld airline's FF programes would also provide some form of minimum miles/points/tier/status credits etc. Currently QF offer a minimum 1000 FF points for their top-tier FF members, and AA offer a minimum 500 Elite Qualifying Points (EQP) per segment flown. So if LGW/LHR is seem as one of the maximum 16 sectors of a OneWorld Explorer, then why not at least provide a consistent FF points/miles etc. payment for a "segment" that only seems to exist as a result of product devaluation.

I've recently switched to OW due to AA's new larger presence in JFK. Are all carriers expected to share award ticket availability equally (via an official or even unofficial rule?) Or, is it *Alliance style where carriers pick and choose which seats are available to their own customers, even though award seats have been released by the "owner" airline?
Also, what are future expnasion probabilities?

Thanks for the info!

I guess I'm wondering if robust protracted argument for change on edge cases (situations we care about but "normal" users wouldn't) is forlorn or not. Giving our feedback loud in clear is different from aiming for real debate that goes beyond stated policy which may result in real change.

I'd hate this thread to become a way to *unconstructively* take out oneworld frustrations on one individual. Even if that person is an official rep.

My question to OnwWorld4U
 

Dear OneWorld4U:

Recently I have booked a LONE4 from AA.Not paid yet but in reservation. I use the OneWorld Itinerary Planner to get all the flight details and called AA to book it. But my little mind is, the OneWorld Itinerary Planner is so wonderful that it can detect most of the breaching on technical rules. I believe it should be made available for us to book online with the One World Itinerrary Planner. It cost me 3 calls almost 3 hours to make the telephone reservation. But with internet I can finish the journey planner in one hour and I can choose the flight available which I prefer to be on.

It might not be suitable for online on-time reservation right now due to the complex taxes/fuel surcharge calculation. But I believe it is possible for us to make a reservation online and get the response regarding total price in 48 hours time. That can save a lot of trouble.

The *A RTW tool has an option to send your itinerary to an airline. Doesn't check availability online, but otherwise sounds like that is what you'd like IC6A?

OW Electronic timetable available for MAC?
 

Hi oneworld4u,

When will you issue the electronic timetable for Mac computers?

Oneworld4u,

My question is whether Oneworld has ever thought about setting up an alliance-wide ticketing desk specifically for the ticketing of oneworld products such as the Oneworld Explorer or the Global Explorer. It seems that the rules are interpreted inconsistently, depending on who is processing the ticket. It also seems to be a huge waste of resources to train and equip many people within the alliance on the various rules, when really only a handful are needed. The tickets could be "issued" by the carrier used for the first longhaul flight, and the cost could be picked up on a pro-rata basis by the ticketing carriers.

Thank you. Darren

I'd second Darren's suggestion. It is logical and seems cost effective. What would be the obstacles to implementing it?

I see one obvious issue in that the different airlines have differing fuel fines which they wish to charge. Wouldn't want a single desk that just charges the highest fines. The current system seems to work ok to me

Dave

More responses from oneworld4u
 

Thanks for all your observations, suggestions and queries, FTers. All your feedback is much appreciated.

Alliance fare sales procedures: Thanks to all for their input to this debate. We are conscious that the current process for buying oneworld fares, such as Explorer, Circle and Visit passes, could be smoother. Because of the huge number of options they offer, they are complicated things to support, from the sales technology standpoint. All I can say at this stage is that we are working on developments which take account of aq number of the key issues raised in your postings, so please be patient for a while longer and, as they say in the ad industry, watch this space!

Open-dated segments: This is one of the difficult issues the industry is having to come to terms with as it flies into the all e-ticket era. While some individual airlines have found ways of allowing open-dated segments with their e-tickets, there is (as far as I am aware - always dangerous to say things like that!) no internationally-accepted industry-wide process or procedure for dealing with them. Things are moving pretty fast in this overall area, however, so keep watching this space, as they say...

headinclouds: Not only did I get your name wrong first time around, but I think I failed to respond to your question, too! So double apologies. BA, Finnair, Iberia, LAN, Malev and Qantas all currently use Amadeus, with Cathay Pacific in the process of moving to it. AA uses Sabre, JAL uses Axess and RJ SITA.

kiwiflyer: Thanks for your input re Star's RTW rules. I note you said they state that various airport co-terminals are NOT to be counted as a segment or transfer. That's the same as oneworld. So transferring from, say LHR Terminal 1 to LHR Terminal 3 is not a segment. But if you have to transfer between different airports - eg LHR to LGW, or DFW to Love Field - that is counted as a segment.

manar: Remind me, if we ever meet, that I owe you a beer!

I hate to sound ungrateful, given the prompt and considerate responses we have received from oneworld4u in a short period of time, but I still see two major issues that remain unanswered.

Issue #1: Transfers between co-terminals count as a segment.
Stated reason: Technical problem, not commercial.
FT suggestion: Use the city code (LON, NYC, etc).
Response: None so far.

Issue #2: OWE limited to 16 segments.
Stated reason: Technical limitation of eTickets.
FT suggestion: Linked PNRs.
Response: None so far.
 

Sorry for being unclear. Certain airports are designated as co-terminals as follows. Any transfer between these are NOT counted as a segment on xRWSTARx (the main *A RTW product), thus more reasonable (IMO) than xONEx.

The IATA list covers the usual ones such as LHR/LGW/etc, NRT/HND, etc.

On the subject of sales procedures, could you clarify how the recently introduced “Canada exception” works? My understanding is that the old rule of having to pay the maximum of the price of country of booking and the price of country of origin now does not apply when booking in Canada. It seems that when ONE tickets are booked through Canadian travel agents then you can pay the point of origin price even if it is lower than the country of booking (i.e., Canada). Given that most people in this forum deal directly with airline round-the-world desks, my question is whether this pricing also works when booking directly with the airline for an origin in, say, South Africa or Japan, but paying for the ticket at a ticket counter of AA, BA, or CX at a Canadian airport?

OneWorld Electronic Timetable for Palm devices
 

OneWorld has contracted with Innovata, Ltd. for its electronic timetables. However, the Innovata product is distinctly inferior to the electronic timetables produced by Goldenware, Inc. for both Star Alliance and SkyTeam.

The most serious problem I have seen is in synchronizing the Palm database. The oneworld data file is so large, that the Palm synchronization software frequently has trouble with it, loses synchronization, and fails, crashing the HotSync utility. By contrast, the Palm timetables for Star Alliance and SkyTeam, that are equally large, have no problems whatsoever. (I keep electronic timetables for all 3 alliances on my Palm PDA. I prefer flying OneWorld, and it is most annoying that the competitors electronic timetables are so much more reliable.)

American Airlines used to offer a OneWorld electronic timetable from Goldenware, which was much superior, technically, to the current product from Innovata.

I would like to suggest that when your contract with Innovata runs out, that you seriously consider switching to GoldenWare as a provider, as their products work much more reliably. Their user interface is also much more pleasant to use, but the reliability issue is the major problem.

Today's posting from oneworld4u
 

Booking FFP award flights: 7Continents, welcome on board oneworld! We appreciate your custom. You asked if all oneworld member airlines are expected to share award ticket availability equally. The simple answer to that is: Yes! One of the key principals of oneworld is that airlines should not give preference to their own FFPers over those from their oneworld partners. So, as far as award flights are concerned, they should not make award tickets available to their own FFPers in preference to FFPers from another oneworld airline...

oneworld expansion: 7Continents also asked about oneworld plans for expansion - and there is a separate effect full of FTers' speculation. Our strategy is to add airline recruits who match the quality standards of the alliance's existing members, who share their priorities of focussing on customers, profit (profitable companies can invest more in service and product) and safety, and who add network coverage, rather than simply replicating what we already offer, in key regions of the world. I am not at liberty to disclose with which airlines we may be in discussions until we are in a position to make a formal announcement for reasons of commercial confidentiality, as I trust most FTers will appreciate.

Viajero: There will be times when FTers post observations or queries that I need to check out with our subject experts before responding. My colleagues travel a great deal and, as we are a small team, they are all very busy with their priority projects. From time-to-time they also rather enjoy an odd weekend with their families and vacations etc. So your patience is appreciated!

oneworld4u - Interesting comment and certainly how I would expect it to occur, and generally does within OW, but there appear to be a number of instances where this doesn't occur.
1. Availability of class upgrade typically restricted to airline's own program
2. OW booking available at different timeframe to own program (eg 330 v 355 days)
3. Special request for high tier members through yield management
4. Plans of FF programs to introduce Any Fare redemptions which will also presumably not be available to other OW members

The discussion about QF awards on LAN flights SYD-AKL-SCL has been moved here, in order to keep this thread focussed on questions for oneworld4u.


Kiwi Flyer
OW moderator

And adding to moa999's questions:

5. What happens if an airline makes the majority of award seats only available to their own FFP even so they shouldn't be doing this as per your post?

16 segment RTW
 

oneworld4u:- This post on the QF Forum says

Due to E-ticket limitations, the maximum segments (including surface segments) will be reduced to 16 (from 20) for:
- Oneworld Explorer Fare (AONE*/DONE*/L#ONE*)
- Global Explorer Fare (AGLOB*/DGLOB*/L#GLOB*)
- Oneworld Circle Trip Explorer Fares (AONEWC*/ DONEWC*/ L#ONEWC*)
- Circle Asia and South West Pacific Explorer Fares (AAS13/17/ DAS13/17/ LAS13/17
All effective 01 June 2008

Is 01 June 2008 the effective date ??

Seems so - QF has updated its tariffs. For the xONEx:

Interesting that the 16 figure includes surface segments. Since the surface segments aren't ticketed (correct me if I'm wrong) then it's surely possible to leave the total flight+surface segement limit at 20 and limit flight segments only to 16.

- James

Surface sectors do count as a sector since a sector between the 2 airports needs to be included

Dave

Surface segments incur -----VOID----- coupons and are hence segments for all intents and purposes.

Here are mine:


I understand that OW is the only airline alliance with a central management team, and that you have an office in Vancouver, BC. Are the members appointed as a representative of each oneworld airline, or did you apply for your position as any other job? If latter, where is the best place to look for interesting job openings?

What are the major challenges of working in a team that spans different corporate philosophies?

What is the most difficult part of getting all of the airlines in the alliance to cooperate? Is it the language barrier(s), the technological gap(s) between the carriers, or something other?

What is the likelihood of OW going out "headhunting," i.e. trying to lure a Skyteam or *A carrier into OW?

What are kinds of qualities do you look for in an airline to be accepted into OW - existing codeshares with OW carriers, profittability, flights to new destinations, or something else?

So far we have seen where OW recruits a carrier to join and the other where an existing OW carrier backs up a carrier for initiation. Are there any differences in the approval process, or are all potential carriers treated with equal consideration?