What you are saying may well be true. Equally I have heard it said that the most ferocious defenders of Skyteam are captive flyers. Certainly you will see that on the Alitalia thread. Also *A and OW seem to do better in public opinion surveys among frequent multidestination flyers . And these people the ones who have the option to choose an alliance who matter.

I am one of them. I fly regularly from Brazil to eveywhere in the world I could nest with any or all the alliances. I stick to OW *A and EK and consciously avoid Skyteam (for the reasons below)

You are of course right that my specific circumstances allow me to rank. But thats also true of many many frequent flyers

Common complaints ref Skyteam

(1) Poor coverage in SOuth America Middle East, India Asia and US (with loss of CO)
(2) No top class airlines ( Five Star) in the alliance.
(3) Poor upgrades and redemption availability for Elites compared to *A and OW
(4) greater number of desinations served but fewer airport lounges (100 less than OW)
(5) Very few flat beds in business class across the alliance


So its not in my view ignorance or limited knowledge... there are empirical reasons (which one may accept or reject) why Skyteam is regarded by many travellers and also comes out in perception surveys etc as the low quality alliance...

I'll give you South America, but what alliance doesn't have issues in the Middle East? SV and MEA aren't gems, but they are coming on board. Similarly, everybody's weak in India until the mess that's the subject of this thread gets sorted. Asia? Seriously? You want to say ST has poor coverage in Asia? KE, CI (soon), CZ, MU, VN plus DL's hub at NRT that's been retained from NW and that's poor coverage? (GA's on their way, too.) If you frequently need to get to HKG or SIN, then CX or SQ are obviously going to be better, but ST is not lacking in Asia. As to the US, the loss of CO didn't hurt things much at all. Again, maybe if you need to get to certain CO-heavy destinations, but DL's network beats the pants off of AA's.

I think ST's major weakness is Australia and New Zealand. There's no way to travel between them or within them on ST, and until GA comes on board, you've got to stay way north and then cut roughly due south to get there. I had hopes that DL could lure VA into the alliance, but as they tie up with EY and NZ and SQ, it starts to look more and more like they want to play the field.

There's some debate about how much SkyTrax's opinion should be trusted.

DL's upgrade policy is pretty awful. I think the redemption issue is more that there's no carrier in the alliance that has a comprehensive award booking engine that makes it easy to check inventory.

Flat beds situation is changing. GA has them, and DL is putting their first refit 763 with flat beds into service tonight on ATL-MAN. The 744s are supposed to be going in, soon, too. AZ is using flat beds that are getting rave reviews. KE's new flat beds are apparently very good, and their A380s have a ton of them. The problem is really AF/KL, who've proved strangely resistant to flat beds.

(1) Poor coverage in SOuth America Middle East, India Asia and US (with loss of CO)

As stated directly above, yes you are correct about South America, then again no one is that strong there, ATM is nice if you are Brazil centric, and LAN Chile is a great airline if you want to go that far West and Down (although that is about to change with their mergers. ST is by far the strongest alliance in Asia, and wil be even stronger when it gets an Indian carrier. The loss of CO is a big deal if you fly a lot to Newark or Houston, otherwise it means little or nothing (or perhaps a few distant Pacific idlands who see less than 200 pax per week)

(2) No top class airlines ( Five Star) in the alliance.
Only someone who does nto fly that often gives any credence to such Star ratings.

(3) Poor upgrades and redemption availability for Elites compared to *A and OW

Compared to who and what exactly?? Is see that you have sone status with EK and TAM, neither which are such great shakes. ST is just as bad as * and better than 1w in this regard.

(4) greater number of desinations served but fewer airport lounges (100 less than OW)

What kind of lounges and where? As was shown in the BA Open doors thread, BA opertaes less than 20 lounges around the World, many are contract lounges used by everyone at a location, furthermore, who expects a loungs in a nothing tiny outpost (for example)

(5) Very few flat beds in business class across the alliance

Compared to who exactly?? And which flat, at an angle or flat flat? I ask because I am sure that some of the airlines which you think are all flat are not (I would wager that 8 of my last 10 SQ flights for example were early 90's era seats) for example, and this is a very subjective subject.

First of all, I am glad, we are talking on the level of facts now, otherwise this entire exercise would not make sense.

Let me make some additional remarks about the 5 aspects mentioned.

(1) Poor coverage in South America Middle East, India Asia and US (with loss of CO)

As others have stated, Middle East is about to be solved, India probably, too (but Star Alliance is not better with India either), Skyteam is, in particular when you count in soon-to-be Skyteam members GA and CI, by far the best alliance for Asia, and DL provides excellent coverage for the US. Regarding South America: Aerolineas Argentina will join next year and at least my Skyteam FFP has teamed up with Gol.
As it has been stated above: the only really weak point is local travel in Australia and New Zealand, but even for all international flights from Australia and New Zealand Skyteam has a better general coverage than any other alliance (unless you cannot do without the few direct flights Qantas offers, but out of BNE there aren't many).

(2) No top class airlines ( Five Star) in the alliance.
Yeah, I am sceptical about this ranking too. Even if it were a true indicator of airline quality, it is simply a fact that there are not many airlines in the 5-star category anyway. So this 5-star thing would only be a criterion for someone who happens to fly regularly origin-destination pairs for which one of these few 5-star-airlines is a reasonable option. For judging an entire alliance, the small number of 5-star airlines is a very bad criterion - a criterion that is not very much related to the practical consequences for everyday travelling.

(3) Poor upgrades and redemption availability for Elites compared to *A and OW
Actually, being a AF/KL Platinum member, I am happy about upgrade and redemption availability. For those *A and OW airlines that would make sense given my travel schedule, the upgrade and redemption situation is worse than on AF/KL.

(4) greater number of destinations served but fewer airport lounges (100 less than OW)
I never had any problem with missing lounges.

(5) Very few flat beds in business class across the alliance
The airlines with flat beds have been mentioned above. Additionally, KL is seriously considering introducing flat beds.


Finally: I am by no means a captive flyer. Actually, when I moved from Europe to BNE recently, I thoroughly and critically reevaluated all my FFP options (to the extent that my partner announced to leave me if I were to spend any more time on analysing FFPs :-) The outcome was clear: Skyteam is the best alliance for me, and this is why I still fly them.

So in sum: as I said above, it does not make sense to claim that Skyteam is the worst alliance. The only reasonable question is: what is the best alliance for YOU?

I realise this is a Skyteam thread and many posters here will be on Skyteam through choice or circumstance, so it was good to engage. Since Im not one of you this will be my last post but I would like to make some observations for your consideration:

It all sounds very defensive. With Skytrax -- why shoot the messenger? Many other surveys accord top quality status to Asiana QR SQ CX and so on (CNN Business Traveller to name just one) ... The frequent litany of not being a frequent flyer seems like a defensive assertion for its own sake. One has no idea how much the person making the point actually travels or what their travel patterns are. Taken at face value most of us seem to travel frequently, some of us I think more diversely than others (Ive done 3 + sectors all but 2 airlines on *A all but 1 airline on OW and 4 Skyteam airlines for example) This will surely lead to different judgements I present mine without needing to draw inferences about the behaviour and expertise of others with whom I engage. Is this unreasonable?


I take the point about having access to these airlines but it is frequent and diverse flyers who do have this access. Sure anyone sitting in a Tier 2 Us city with specific flying patterns all this is not relevant But it is to global travellers

ON coverage in the Asia Pacific: Vietnam airlines is tiny and cannot possibly compete with the likes of TG SQ and CX in Asia Skyteam ahs no ANZAC airline, no Japanese airline In the middle East Im sorry but OW has RJ and Star had Egyptair and Turkish I cannot see how Saudia can ever compete with these. And Delta/NW is simply not in the same league as US+UA+CO+AC and just about matches AA

I never said anything about anyone having difficulty finding lounges Simply stating that skyteam has much fewer lounges in relatrion to network density

Hfly your point about flat beds -- I mean flatbeds. See seatguru for the definition. Of course I do take your point about what is good for an individual but if individuals with a choice choose and the aggregate choice points in a particular direction then it is possible to rank order these alliances On this basis I would wish that the best two airlines of India stay far and clear of Skyteam and this is not just my view but shared by many OPs

Anyway I have no wish to enter into an argument on the merits of relative alliances. Some people must be happy with Skyteam otherwise it would cease to exist Im just trying to point out that when people express a reason for preferring their favourite airlines NOT to be in Skyteam -- and there are many here-- but dont see such grumbling about OW and Star, its not without a logical basis. The only people who feel negatively about Skyteam are not misinformed rare flyers. There are reasons and good ones to make such a judgement They are clearly not compelling ones for everyone but dismissing them with arguments such as ""what is a flatbed anyway"" or ""only people who dont fly frequently assume that SQ QR CX Asiana (for example) are not rated as top service airlines globally"" sounds like a bad case of Stockholm syndrome to me.

I certainly was not meaning to denigrate OZ, QR, SQ, or CX. However, there is something fishy going on with Hainan's 5-star rating, as evidenced by a sizeable thread in the Other Asian Airlines forum. Skytrax has gotten VERY defensive about what appears to be Hainan buying a rating.

VN might be tiny. However, when you add up VN, GA, CI, CZ, MU, and KE and throw in DL's NRT-based service that's significant coverage of Asia.

We've already noted the absence of Australia/New Zealand carrier, which last I checked is not part of Asia, which is where you tried to point out a SkyTeam weakness originally. Considering that until a couple months ago there were only two such carriers (and DJ/VA is still getting off the ground, really), I think this can be excused. Now if SkyTeam can't rope in VA (and hopefully VS in the process) within five years, I think we'll have a problem on our hands. As far as Japan goes, it doesn't appear there are any free agents to acquire, and SkyTeam's coverage there is likely sufficient for everyone outside of Japan.

MS? SV is dodgy, but I think I might fly them again before I'd get on MS. RJ and TK I'll give you. Let's see what ME can bring to SkyTeam.

This just doesn't measure up to the facts of the US aviation industry. Since you want to write off the small markets, DL's network is just as good or better than the others. Saying it just about matches AA is absurd.

Do I think SkyTeam is flawless? Certainly not. I started with NW before they were even in SkyTeam because I lived in North Dakota. I then moved to ATL for six years, where SkyTeam was about the only option. Now, they're just as good of an option as anything for me during my two years based at LHR. Sure, I could get a couple non-stops out of BA/BD where I'm one-stopping on AF/KL/AZ, but the prices are competitive and my most frequent destinations back in the US are ATL and FAR, which are easiest to get to on DL. (Non-stop to ATL 11x weekly from LHR and daily from LGW, and I can get mainline or 2-cabin RJs MSP-FAR with DL but not with AA or UA on ORD/DEN-FAR.)

For someone who needs to travel a lot in the Middle East or Australia, SkyTeam might not be the best option. However, it works for a lot of us, and many of the people who like to poke fun of SkyTeam have set foot on very few SkyTeam flights. There's clearly room for three global alliances, and I think it's in everyone's best interest to have them all be as strong as possible. Not at all thrilled with bringing SV on board, but let's see what happens.

Firstly, I believe that I have more perspective than you could possibly imagine, yes I am DM/2MM on DL and Platinum for life on AFKL, oh but then again I am a long time LH Senator AS WELL AS a TK E+, oh yeah, there is the BA Gold that I have held consecutively for the last 14 years straight and my EK Gold Status (oh yeah my EY status as well that I am letting slide). I am hostage to no airline nor alliance and fly each as they are advantageous for me and me alone. I have flown all St airlines save TAROM, all Oneworld airlinmes save LAN and all the serious airlines in Star Alliance (I am not including Tyrolean air and junk like that), Segments? Without going into too many boring details, lets just say that I have over 1000 segments across the ST airlines, probably 800 across the * airlines and another similar number across the 1W airlines, I really do know what I am talking about, and just as in the real World I have noticed that no serious real world FF gives any credence to Skytrax 'stars" they are usually quoted by the same sort of people that brag that they only stay in Schrager hotels, or use Quintessentially............

Also I have flown Hainan Airlines and while not Air Koryo, are not up there, and in my opinion neither is Qatar either

Now continuing with reality, I love CX, I really do, and when I am flying to/fr/through HKG I try to fly them, however other than that with one or two fifth freedom exceptions that they have they are just not convenient, nor are they a particularly large carrier, All of China's major carriers are exponentially bigger and 2 out of three of them are ST members (China Southern, China Eastern AND Shanghai Airlines AND China Airlines - Taiwan soon,) Then there is Korean and the fact that DL is the third largest airline in Japan with fifth freedom routes that cannot be duplicated by anyone.......oh yeah, and Vietnam Airlines which you harped on about. You have Garuda AND an Indian carrier coming in as well.

The Middle East? Here is a secret for you...........The action is in the Gulf, and the Gulf carriers do not want to join alliances, so everyone gets the flotsam, so who cares??

Australia and NZ? I always love these statements on FT. Australia/NZ is a tiny market 20 odd million people at the end of the World. There are two options QF and NZ, they are accounted for, You can get there using ST airlines, that is enough. Quite honestly whenever I see people moaning about this it is not, 'Gee I wish XX flew there more becuase I do business there and want to fly there 10 times a year" but rather, "I wish they flew there so I could use my miles!!"

BTW SV may be dodgy, 15 years ago so was TK, now look at what they have become (and ST actually turned TK down before the application stage a long time ago, TK is now bigger than BA and in many respects better, BTW I suppose you know no Turkish people as TK does NOT call itself a Middle Eastern carrier, nor do Turks consider their country to be the Middle East). At the end of the day it is like those who used to harp on about Aeroflot in Skyteam, forgetting the fact that it is now a pretty decent carrier (at least on its intl flights) but the fcat is that it benefitted those who had to fly to Russia and maybe helped a few out with routings that they would otherwise not have had available, it gave options..........That is what SV will bring to the table. And I do have to say that ST membership has done more t o straighten out developing airlines in the last 10 years than any other alliance has done (Korean, Aeroflot, CSA and Vietnam Airlines all come to mind).

Thanks for sharing your experience hfly! It's always interesting to read about these things from the perspective of someone who's don a ton of travelling.

While each alliance probably will end up with an Indian carrier, with the financial troubles of Kingfisher and Air India I think timeframes are likely to be more than a couple of months.

It may surprise you to realise that there are well informed frequent flyers such as myself who have a veritable laundry list of reasons to avoid Star Alliance. Perhaps because we don't post them in the Star Alliance forum and then accuse Star fans of suffering from a psychological ailment.

:-) :-) :-)

Let me just say clearly and without bias, as both an American-based flyer and elite on both Delta (ST) and Continental (*A)...

Both alliances have amazing cover of the United States. Before the merger of UA and CO, Delta for a singular airline trumped all with the merger of DL and NW and today maintains unique coverage of small markets in the Midwest that NW covered as well as the Southeast that DL covered. UA/CO is strong with small markets in the West. US is a throwaway to be honest. I mean, it is the ugly sister no one wants without any real specialty and in looking at their domestic map, it has limited coverage versus both UA/CO, DL and AA.

For most flyers and Americans, you're flying from major market to major market--the most populous 100 metropolitan areas of the US are all within a 90 minute drive of an airport that is covered by both if not all three alliances.

So unless you're flying to International Falls, Minnesota (which is losing all coverage (Delta) soon because of a loss of FAA subsidies) you're fine. Stop the trolling.

And really, all Americans are desperately wanting to fly JetBlue in any case.

what did I say that generated such a defensive response from you? Why is the Skyteam forum generally so defensive and thin-skinned?

As I already said at least once, be wise and don't feed the troll.

Anyone read any updates?!?! Come on Skyteam!!! Pull your finger out and get an Indian carrier!!

This tells all. In which world does 3+ sectors qualifies as more expreience than 100's?