MrCharming

My experience with having to transit in CDG is a no go. If I was based in Paris then AF would of course be a nobrainer .

I'd much rather transfer through FRA, MUC or Zurich. SK will continue to get a lot of my traffic as I fly around CPH OSL ARN weekly.

And as already mentioned, Biz fares tend to be much more competitively priced with the LH group vs AF/KLM.

We like to vacation in Asia where Skyteam is also not a great option.

alibi

Agree on all three points here, but I expect LH prices to go up when they introduce their new cabin.

SK2751

Also, a normal market mechanism is likely to work: if this switch to ST and expected joining some JV is indeed going to lower competition (a bit) then it will have positive influence on prices across the market, also in *A (a bit).

FlyingMoose

Amen!

Unless you have some personal frugality desires that get in the way, pricing issues when doing corporate travel are things you can move past with career advancement. It is not clear if your challenge is that these flights are out of policy for your travel or if the cost issue lies elsewhere. A better product and shorter travel time obviously come at a higher cost.

UA doesn't fly to ARN anymore so any UA hub you'd use today would require a layover in CPH. How is ARN-CPH-IAD-XXX better than a hypothetical ARN-DTW-XXX? I find DTW and MSP to be much better airports to transit than EWR/IAD/ORD.

TPAC on KE is totally fine and a great product. CI and GA are fine to, I'll miss SQ and NH for sure but it'll hardly impact travel. LATAM offerings with KL and AF get me everywhere better and faster than SK routing me through EWR/MIA or even LH options.

tr3k

I doubt LH will match the lifetime status from SK. Usually status matches are for one year or so.

MrCharming

I meant LTG from SK. Not expecting Lifetime status match from LH although that would be nice :-). But I'd hate to have to start with LH from nothing..

gojko88

If starting from nothing, you should choose a better FFP than LH in the first place

MrCharming

Why?

dark_phoenix

I do have a senior role, but that is also completely irrelevant. If the corporate or retail fares aren't competitive unless you're a senior executive who can work around them, than that is an issue. I don't consider the AFKLM or DL product to be far superior to LH or UA (but they are compared to SK itself). And again, your comment about shorter travel time is only relevant to you based on your travel patterns. Your Mileage Obviously Varies, but your mileage is not the barometer by which everything else should be judged (and neither is mine, FWIW). All I can do is re-state that when it comes to TATL and TPAC, SK and S* today usually provides me with no more than one-connection routing (sometimes two connections, but that is rare for me). As I am *already* flying the shortest distances to the places I fly to the most because they're only one connection away, I am not sure what I would be paying more for. I upgrade quite a bit, so as someone who spends a fair bit of time at the pointy end of the plane, a significantly higher markup for an airplane meal isn't worth it - at least not to me. The seats are mostly what I am after and there is only so much you can do to a reverse herringbone configuration. So looking forward to some amazing seats and suite-like experiences on AFKLM and DL for the higher cost

To answer your question about what hypothetical travel would be different, I can only defer to what I have written before. Most of my flying with S* is ARN-XXX-XXX (I think it's important to compare them objectively...whether the first connection occurs isn't as important as that there is only one connection). When I have described why switching alliances doesn't get me anything, it is precisely because SK long-haul routes or a simple connection to a S* partner already gives me what I need for the places I travel both TPAC and TATL. I don't consider the connections in any of those airports particularly onerous. I am generally okay with most lounge experiences as well (note that I will never defend the SK lounge at EWR under any circumstances - we all know that it is patently awful).

And all of that is valid for you. And that's cool. It's just not valid for me. So far, it looks like moving to ST will potentially increase my travel time. I hope I am proven incorrect in my assumption, but I will have to wait and see what routes open up.

vanillabean

🎵 Why, oh why, oh why?
'Cause I don't know the answers.
Goodby goodbye goodbye.

What make the landlord take money?
Why, oh why, oh why?
I don't know that one myself.
Goodbye goodbye goodbye.

Why's there no pennies for ice cream
Why, oh why, oh why?
You put all the pennies in the telephone.
Goodbye goodbye goodbye. 🎵

gojko88

Very onerous requirements for reaching *G vs. other FFPs and high surcharges on awards come to mind. Great if LH is your "home" airline and you fly enough to make SEN easily, but other FFPs (like A3, TP or TK) are closer to Eurobonus in terms of qualification levels and status perks.

tr3k

That just gives you 1 year of status. AFAIK LH does not have any easier qualification requirements for the existing status holders.

FFlash

Confirmed saya the article but how confirmed. Cannot read the paid for article.

CPH-Flyer

Confirmed as in the article states that Lufthansa said so. But I would be surprised if they did not, question will be about the details....

jamesbrownontheroad

Over on the LH forum, a LH HON** asks what the *A lounge situation will be in ARN, CPH, OSL, GOT from 1st September.

Good question. In the short term, LH might (maybe) pay SK to continue using their lounges on a contract basis. But with LH, LO, LX, and OS I can count at least 25 daily short-haul departures and at least 4,000 available seats departing from each of the SK hubs.

Perhaps one or more of the SK hubs has enough LH Group flights for a LH lounge to be built, or maybe a generic Star Alliance lounge like in AMS?