The OW future targets?
 

It's been spoken about again and again... OW doesn't saturate the world with airline coverage, which personally I think is a good thing. I've always preferred quality over quantity.

However in this day and age quantity counts for something... I know it's been gone over time and time again... however as of July 2009 whom do we think is the best addition to OW and who should the MANAGMENT BE TARGETING STRONLY?

My personal opinion;
India: Jet Airways; India has huge potential as an aviation market and Jet is quality
Africa: Don't know... not familiar enough with them
EU: Southern Countries underepresented
ASIA: Southern Asia - need more representation
Northern Asia: Need a big and quality Chinese representative (mainland)
South and Central America: Relatively Strong

Others??

Ethiad recently codeshared with AA and QF.
Would ad to RJs mid-east coverage

AA just announced codeshares and mileage earning with Gol, in Brazil. I'm happy about it because i'll earn on flights up to brazil, but really it's not strictly necessary. One AA was already running domestic flights in brazil on a few routes. Sao Paulo - Rio, and Sao Paulo - Belo Horizonte.

To me where OW fails is africa.

What type of rights does AA have on these domestic routes though? From a oneworld perspective, for example, could a BA passenger connect in GRU onto an AA flight to GIG? I think GOL is still a useful addition to AAdvantage.

I agree with you about Africa. Who would be the best candidate for African coverage? Ethiopian? To be honest, Star Alliance is not strong in Africa either. Admittedly, they have Egypt Air and SAA. However, JNB is likely too far south to be a suitable hub from most points. SkyTeam probably has the best African presence of all of the alliances with DL providing service from North America, AF/KL/KQ from Europe and KQ from Asia. KQ's NBO hub is also located in a good spot for a hub.

ET have made it very clear that they are aiming at *A membership - they have existing relationships with BD SN LH and SA. I believe that they just signed a codeshare arrangement with TK though I am not sure when it comes into effect , and according to the following link they are negotiating codeshares with TG SQ UA and MS

http://airlineroute.blogspot.com/200...tar-entry.html

this would seem to make them a pretty unlikely candidate for OW , especially as they have not a single codeshare or FF relationship with any OW carrier .

although I concede that *A could do with a more central hub in Africa I note from the following wiki link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...orts_in_Africa.

that the 3 busiest airports in Africa by pax volume are JNB , CAI and CPT all strong bases for *A , furthermore if they tie up ET as well they will also have a hub at the number 7 airport ADD.



I concede that Africa is not a big player internationally in total traffic , but , package holiday routes aside , the yields should tend to be pretty good as many markets remain tightly regulated .


Back to who OW should pursue in Africa .

I personally think the most logical choice is Arik Air , however , I think it will be a few years before they are ready for an global alliance , but LOS is a good location geographically and with a reasonable amount of high yielding traffic , the downside of course is that there is no guarantee that the next time Nigeria changes government that they wont decided to favour another carrier and shun Arik Air .

If you look at the rest of the top 10 airports they are either - holiday destinations such as Hurghada or Sharm el-Sheik , or tied up to Star - CAI , JNB , CPT and probably ADD , or natural candidates for Skyteam ie NBO already in Skyteam and Casablanca and Algiers with strong cultural ties to France , and , if I am not mistaken existing ties to AF for their respective carriers .

On the plus side for OW in Africa I believe that BA actually extended their franchise agreement with Comair until somewhere around 2018 , a welcome exception to their practice in recent years of shedding franchisees.

Same topic as these threads (and numerous others)
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/onewo...ld-member.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/onewo...2008-whom.html

We seem to get this subject recycled every few months in one guise or another :(
Am sure Oneworld just ignore them

Future oneworld member airlines
 

Mwenenzi: Just to prove that oneworld does not simply ignore these kinds of postings (!), here's some scene-setting on oneworld's membership strategy from the alliance's official FT participant.

oneworld’s focus has always been on the quality rather than the quality of our members. We believe this is what makes oneworld stand out as an alliance - and the CEOs of our member airlines have directed that we should maintain this approach.

We firmly believe that our alliance comprises some of the strongest airline brand names in the world. By concentrating on quality, oneworld prides itself on providing excellent standards across the whole alliance network so that, when a member airline transfers one of their customers over to travel on a oneworld partner, they can be confident that the service the customer receives will be top notch in that region.

From the very start, oneworld has always been very selective about which airlines we regard as potential recruits.

First, we have only ever considered carriers with brands that match those of our established partners – who, just to emphasise, we firmly believe include the best and highest quality airlines from each region of the world.

Second, we are only interested in working with airlines who share the same approach as us to this business – with safety, quality customer service and profitability as their priorities.

Thirdly, we look for potential recruits who can expand our existing combined network rather than simply duplicating what our existing members already offer.

We currently have two members elect, lining up to join us:

• Mexicana, Central America's leading airline, which will come on board later this year.
• S7, Russia's leading domestic airline, which will follow during 2010.

Bearing in mind that oneworld is currently the only alliance with member airlines based on all continents (if you don't count Antarctica), we think our network already offers the best coverage of most of the key places the vast majority of our key target customer base (frequent, international business travellers) want to fly to.

Beyond our existing members and members elect, there are just a few strategic regions of the world where we believe we could benefit from new members. These include, over time, Brazil, Canada, India and Mainland China.

But beyond this, we see little scope for adding more airlines without diluting the quality we offer our customers and the value the alliance generates for its existing members, through network overlap etc.

This is a different membership approach from some of our competitors’ – but we are convinced it is right for oneworld, right for our member airlines and right for our customers.

One key benefit of our highly selective approach to membership is keeping the alliance relatively small in terms of members - and this is a big help in innovating services and benefits that we believe our customers really value. This has helped us become the first alliance with full e-ticket interline between all member airlines (by some three years), first to accept on-line bookings for any alliance fares, and two projects now underway - first to enable FFP members to book redemption flights on all member airlines on-line and first with all member airlines selling flights by all alliance partners via their own websites.

As for which airlines we are considering for potential future membership, our policy is not to comment publicly on any discussions with outside parties. If they ever lead to a firm proposal, we would announce this in the appropriate manner.

Happy travelling.

Thank you oneworld4U for this insight into the membership strategy of OW! This is very informative and I guess most people here will agree with this quality approach. Yes, it would always be nice to fly OW to any airfield on the planet but in general the coverage is quite good.

I still wonder which OW airline is actually based in Africa...

BAs franchise carrier Comair , although their coverage is limited to Southern Africa plus Mauritius

Which, with all due respect, is like changing planes at Narita and telling people you've visited Japan. How about saying an intercontinental airline based in each continent?

I quite agree with you , but we are talking marketing here so it is all just puffery in the end , after all , for all OW likes to make itself sound exclusive - ie

This is a different membership approach from some of our competitors’ – but we are convinced it is right for oneworld, right for our member airlines and right for our customers.

the fact remains that when the current round of expansion is finished OW will serve around 750 destinations according to their own PR while *A will serve slightly over a thousand - so if I am a OW customer and OW cannot take me where my business needs me to go how is that right for our customers ?

The other two alliances do exactly the same sort of thing ( I have seen a long thread on another forum talking about how impressive the NRT hub of DL/NW is - with never a mention of the fact that the only reason it is needed is because Skyteam are the only alliance without a Japanese member , and *A has also been known to indulge themselves in the odd spot of hyperbole too)

Furthermore Comair claim to be out of the alliance for some purposes (when it suits them) and deny alliance benefits.

Highly unlikely, but a figure of thought:

What's the likelihood of OW starting up its own African carrier instead of luring someone in?

I know not strictly an African carrier - but one that I think would fit the OW profile and be a great strategic partner for linking Africa to Asia and Australasia would be MK.
Otherwise in Africa the choices are very limited and frankly none of them up to the same standard of any other OW carriers or SA/ET etc

MK are very close to AF ( codeshares / FF programme ) although I guess with KQ already in Skyteam there is probably no room for MK in there . They have a lot of problems currently on their plate ( chronic overstaffing and a 2 year hedging contract for 100% of their fuel at an extortionate price ) They also serve surprisingly few cities in Africa ( CPT , JNB , DUR , NBO on the mainland all of which are already served by Comair , and three of them are also served by BA mainline ) the only new destinations they would offer OW would be Antananarivo , St Dénis de la Réunion and Rodrigues - not exactly a huge contribution to the network .

Or a Korean startup carrier for the China - Korea routes? ;)

I think the moment someone in Vancouver suggests this in a board meeting you will see that person do bungee jumping with concrete on their feet off the Capilano Bridge a few minutes later.

;) No, the Lynn Canyon suspension bridge, because it's free. No point in wasting Loonies on loonies.

Eh?

How can they be Central America's leading airline with just FOUR destinations in the region and no hub outside North America? :rolleyes:

OW used to have slightly better coverage in Africa... BA's franchise Regional Air had a regional hub at NBO to JNB/KRT/ASM/JIB for some time but this went away several years ago.

I will always wonder why no alliance is considering MH ? They have a very good product on par with the best carriers around, but still. Plus, there is a huge market to take at SQ.

I switch form ST to OW.

Also, we have to bear in mind that EK, QR or EY are not willing to step in an alliance. I guess they will undergo to much pressure to soar their price?

Skyteam. But don't expect them to join soon, both because Skyteam procedures aren't so fast (for example, TAROM have been about to join the alliance since approximately the beginning of time), and because MH is a government-owned entity in a rather slow-moving, bureaucratic place.

There are a few potential options for oneworld in my opinion....and they are as follows for the following reasons

Asia (including China)
I still firmly believe that AIR CHINA could possibly defect from Star to oneworld, especially given the close links with CX. I mean, if MU and FM merger does go ahead...this could mean these two airlines could be part of Star, allowing CA to join oneworld.

CX does have a close relationship with MH.....and AF seems to be against MH joining oneworld from what I have heard. We could possibly see MH join oneworld??

Middle East/India
For India, I am starting to believe you are more likely to see IT join oneworld as opposed to 9W as they joined the oneworld explorer airfare. But I think one or the other will join oneworld eventually. After all, 9W has developed a close relationship with airlines such as QF

GF could be a potential inclusion. First, they are a member of the global explorer airfare. Second, former RJ CEO Samer Majali is now the head of GF.....so it might be easy for GF to join oneworld.

Alternatively, EY may be a strong possibility given the new established relationships with both QF and AA

Africa....
I don't mean to sounds ignorant, but from what I have seen, African Airlines are either scary....or aligned to Star and Skyteam. What is left for oneworld in Africa? Air Zimbabwe?? Libyan Airlines?? TunisAir and Royal Air Maroc are more likely to join Skyteam given the French link??

-----

Now, in a Utopian world where I had ultimate power, I would like to see SQ, SR, EK and 9W join oneworld....I shall keep dreaming. :)

yes , QF does have a frequent flyer/codeshare arrangement with 9W , so do 3 other OW airlines , 8 *A airlines , 3 Skyteam airlines and a host of non-aligned airlines - I think IT is a much stronger candidate for OW than 9W is , especially since they have , as you mentioned , joined the global explorer fare .


bearing in mind that OW keep talking about avoiding overlap and limiting the number of members to around a dozen worldwide why would they bring in a second airline in the Middle East ? I am aware that geographically there is some distance between AMM and BAH , but I still dont see it happening without a major shift in OW recruitment strategy. If you dont mind my asking what specifically do you see GF offering OW ? In recent years they seem to have been almost the definition of a boom and bust cycle ... expand , contract , expand , contract , expand .... far more so than any other carrier I can think of .


I realise that you are talking hypothetically but here is my 25MUR worth.

SQ - in spite of constant rumours ( which, in my experience , for some reason mainly seem to come from Skyteam supporters ) I do not see SQ quitting *A . The main 'evidence' given for their supposed desire to change is their lack of teamwork and halfhearted commitment to *A - personally I think they would be the same whichever alliance they were in, they have always been a bit of a Prima Donna . Furthermore , around the time of the MX exit from *A there were frequent rumours about a 2 year "standdown" clause for *A members which , IIRC , prevents them from joining another alliance within 2 years of departure from *A . I have no idea whether this clause actually exists , or is just another FT/Anet urban legend , but it would not surprise me if there is such a clause , if it does exist I think that in the current economic circumstances SQ would need a pretty compelling case to swap alliances if such a decision caused a 2 year period in alliance ' limbo' .

if by SR you mean LX , blame BA , LX were announced as a future OW airline several years ago and BA screwed it up and drove them into the arms of LH and *A . They would have been a great addition to OW as all of their existing European hubs LHR MAD BUD HEL are on the edge of the continent with a sodding great gap in the middle which LX and their ZRH hub would have satisfied nicely ... still , OWs loss definitely turned out to be *A's gain .

EK have a fantastic network , but I am not sure what they would offer an alliance - they dont actually generate much traffic of their own from what I can tell , they just cannibalise it from other airlines . There is also the problem of their extreme inconsistency in both hard and soft product - when they are good they are outstanding, but when they are bad they are frankly bloody awful - feedback I have had lately has been more towards the bloody awful end of the spectrum than the outstanding end . Lastly , there is that fact that even more so than SQ they seem to feel that they should be calling the tune in any arrangements they make , so I dont see them as a 'team player'

My understanding is that MH elected not to join an alliance as their management team felt it not in their best interest.

VN joining ST however will help till fill the SE Asia void.

Have they said that officially (I don't recall seeing it), or is it all part of the rumour mill?


There really isn't that much of a void- CAN is quite convenient for connections around SE Asia. You wanna talk ST voids; look at South America!

Official.

Sorry but CAN is a long way from SE Asia. Even HKG is a bit of a stretch and some could argue OW could do with another partner in the region although this is likely to only happen if QF takeover another carrier (MH is definite candidate for this) or Jetstar (including Jetstar Asia) finally enters as some sort of OW associate member.

Seriously, do you have any idea of the distance between the two??

Had there been a city between them instead of the SAR border, they 'd probably be considered co-terminals!

Having been to both I know how close they are to each other although co-terminals is a bit of a stretch. That would be like saying NCE and LHR could be co-terminals. My point is that HKG is not SE Asia. :)

Just a wee bit exaggerated - from gcm HKG-CAN is 84 miles, LHR-NCE is 647 miles. London & Birmingham is a better comparison (87 miles).

LGW-LTN are co-terminals located 51 miles apart. 51 is much closer to 84 than 647!

Nevertheless, neither HKG or CAN are SE Asia.

If I'm going from Penang to Denpasar, either one is quite a detour just to maintain allegiance to an airline marketing alliance.

MH would fill this void nicely for OW (but not likely).

Agreed! ;)

Since 1834 MH is rumored to join Skyteam but not much has eventuated yet.

since 1834 ? which time zone are we talking here ? it is only 1738 in Kuala Lumpur at the moment . :D

And here in Boston, it's 2009!!!

I might have exaggerated a bit. Sorry, won't happen again. ;)

I think Cathay Pacific currently has agreements with Air China for eg. capability with Asia Miles also codesharing would allow OW's exposure to China.
Furthermore, since Cathay Pacific is an Hong Kong based airline, it would not be surprising to see China may offer all 5th to 8th traffic rights to all Hong Kong passenger and freight carriers as a part of CEPA hence Cathay Pacific can acutally operate in China hence no Chinese carriers is necessary.
For South East Asia Network, I think OW may need more exposure, but it can do it not even to invite a new airline to come in. JetStar Asia/Pacific, a Qantas Group Airline, is now a big profit-driver for Qantas Group. So OneWorld can try to liaise with Qantas to form a new full-service airline or to convert 3K/BL to full service with other OW Airlines - a joint venture project will help simply. This might work even better.
Finally for Brazilian network, I think LAN can try to set up LAN Brazil sometime later as of their other LAN Airlines. I don't think OW will need a new airline for that region tho.
The only region left over might be Central Asia, which would pretty despreate a new airline to join. But I believe 9W and IT knows their position in any alliance is so important hence they will rather not to join at this time until those 3 alliances offer enough prviliages/terms favourable enough for 9W & IT to join.

And Africa? Or does than not feature on your map of the world? :)

Given S7's pending membership I'm not so sure this region isn't covered adequately, although some route tweaks by S7 would be welcome.