Whither Emirates?
 

Another world class airline not in any major alliance that I am aware of... does some codeshares with CO... would make an excellent addition to ST, no?

Well, yes. They just don't happen to be looking for an alliance to join for the moment, AFAIK. Although this might change any time - look at what happened to South African

And look at the major competition that is building up fast in the region of the UAE: Etihad, Gulf, Oman!

I would expect Emirates to join an alliance as soon as they halfway finished / published their expansion plans. Alliances may tend to try to limit the expansion of their new members if they touch routes other members already serve...

Emirates surely would be a great milestone for skyteam in becoming a powerful alliance. And KL/CO/NW even have their RTW tickets together with EK as a partner (same argument pro MH in skyteam)...

So I think there is hope, albeit not in the next 1 or 2 years I guess...

Yes, Emirates WOULD make an excellent addition to ST, except I am not sure that they want to dilute their carefully built brand by joining a decidedly iffy bunch where Europe is represented by Air France and Alitalia (perhaps Strike Team is a better name? :p ), and Czech Airlines with their charter-quality seating pitch and not-quite-the-worst service.

When Aeroflot joins ST, now THAT is going to scream quality :td: (despite all their modern-ish planes and slightly improved service). If I were running an airline I would actually pay money for NOT being associated with Aeroflot in any way (well I know Air France did not mind, but they don't have much to lose in terms of image do they?).

I think Emirates, with their service quality and their fantastic reputation would be MAD to joing ST.

Maybe I am wrong; but somehow I think that more likely entrants into ST are Ghana Airways and Lithuanian Airlines... :p

El Al has a close relationship (including codesharing) with Delta and this might discourage Emirates.

Well thats a bit harsh, but I agree Sky Team is definately the 3rd place global alliance. Speak to anybody from France however and they won't fly with anybody but Air France - although to debate the reasons behind this could turn into something of a racist rant!

I though Emirates awarded points on BA Exec club though? Surely they are closer to one world?

Really? On what basis?

Also, Emirates and BA are terminating their agreement at the end of October; surprised you didn't know that as a BA flyer.

Whilst not in any alliance like ST, Emirates does have partnerships with Singapore, JAL, United, Delta, SAA, Continental, and BA (although this is ending) so EK miles can be earnt with any of the above and vice versa.

When it comes to elite economy class flyers and frequent flyer benefits, Oneworld is way behind the others. Star is the best since they give double miles even on cheap tickets, Skyteam comes 2nd by giving a 50% bonus. At least that's the case with me being top level with UA and AF. I used to be top level with BA, but I don't fly them or any Oneworld carrier anymore since they don't care about rewarding economy passengers.

Actually I hardly fly BA at all - mainly Star but lately I have done a lot of Sky Team. I often book cheap economy tickets and Sky give full miles whereas One World give 25% - 50%. Also it was a piece of cake to get to Silver on Sky and I am almost at Gold, again mainly on cheapo eceonomy tickets, although some have been business. And cos hardly anybody flies Sky Team, if you get Silver or Gold it feels very elite compared to, say, BA, where T1 LHR is crawling with Gold BA's. And Tier bonus is awarded on all tickets no matter what class/price, although the Star basis of giving a Tier bonus on a business fare is more generous.

But your point that the airlines in Sky are second rate compared to OW and *A cannot be disputed - however the scheme itself is reasonable and given that on many routes I fly I have no choice but Sky then I am thankful for that.

Are you guys living in another decade? This is better than that? Let's be real here in comparing alliances, breaking them down airline or region to region, they are much the same (bad) as eachother, Compare the US carriers, DL, UA, AA, etc are much the same as eachother in terms of service. Throw in the now additional US carriers into the mix (US in *, CO and NW in ST), and ST gets the advantage in terms of flights and options. Europe? As much as I hate AF, they are the worst, yet still big and KLM IMHO is an okay airline, I rate LH pretty low and while BA is the best of that bunch, they have gotten worse and worse. All in all Star has the slight advantage here when the smaller Euro carriers are thrown in. Africa? SAA will at some point come into *, no date given yet and then that will be an advantage. In Asia ST and * have the advantage as SQ and Thai beat out CX in 1world and all are better than KE. Star wins basically through options and diversity with the two carriers, if MH goes ST, this will put them up the charts. Australia... 1world is there and no one else (for all 20 million of them) ANZ is in actual fact a tiny airline that seems bigger because they have big planes that do long routes .

In short it seems to me that the proper order is *,1w,ST.

I think most people agree with you on your summary! I am not sure about your opening line though :confused:

Well, one measure would be comparing the number of threads and posts for *A, OW and ST, respectively :D

Seriously, I do not think there is anything intrinsically bad about Sky Team, but I just find it difficult to take an alliance very seriously if its core members are Air France and Alitalia. :td:

I know you can have bad experience on any airline and my God I had my share of shoddy treatment on many members of OneWorld and *A, but there is little that can compare with consistent and reliable insolvency and industrial relations news feed generated by Alitalia and AF. Maybe things will improve when KLM is seen as their central (and hopefully standard-setting) member.

As for Aeroflot joining them ST a new member, call me unimaginative, but I do to see how this fail to cause a string of jokes and uncharitable labels. On domestic Aeroflot flights, can premium tier ST members expect to be upgraded from Regular Economy to Upper Economy (the one with actual seating?) :D

Reply to a misguided soul.
 

Why? AF is massive (isn't it the biggest airline in the world?) and they 've been making quite a bit of money recently. That means somebody must be flying them. I can't imagine loads of people buying a service they aren't satisfied with. And AZ's network and J-class offers aren't too bad either.

It appears you haven't been reading the news recently. It's been years since the words "Air France" and "insolvency" were last mentioned in the same breath. Alitalia has certainly had lots of problems, but would you care to guess the country that would have been suffering from the biggest airline collapses in history had it not been for state aid? Hint: it's not in the same continent as Italy.

KLM's balance sheet was in the red when it was taken over by AF, so clearly it wasn't an example to the airline industry. The KL forum could also help you understand that catering on KLM has always been substandard, and that the Flying Dutchman Helpdesk doesn't really live up to its name.

I've never flown SU, but FTers who have tend to be positive about their flight experiences with them. It's near impossible to argue that SU isn't the best airline in Russia/W.Asia and could even offer upgrades to *A and OW elites from walking to reach their destinations within/around Russia to have them get on a plane.


When it comes to comparing the three alliances, I rank ST second behind * but ahead of OW. The latter doesn't even cover Europe adequately (big holes in various parts of Central and Eastern Europe, and the Balkans), has just one member from Northern/C. America and only one Asian hub.

My regional rankings (not too different from hfly's):
Europe: *A and ST joint first, OW
Northern and Central America: ST, *A, OW
S. America: *A, OW, ST
Africa: ST (lots of routes), *A and OW joint second (could change if/when SAA join Star without Kenyan joining ST)
Asia: *A, ST and OW joint second (will change with MH's accession)
Australia: OW, *A, ST


When you remember that a fair few OW carriers don't want FFs who buy anything less than full Y (BA's TEN cheapest booking classes earn fewer miles than a dozen packs of biscuits from Tesco), it kinda becomes clear that the only FF OW is really capable of helping is the premium class passenger travelling between London and the US with the occassional sidetrip to a major Asian capital and a little personal weekend travel to mainstream EU destinations. I wouldn't imagine that such a traveller would want much help from an airline alliance (apart from having somebody else bumped from a flight so that the FF could take their place).

Reply from misguided soul
 

I agree that I am probably not being very rational. However, customer choice are often down to subjective To me, AF and AZ are the symbols of what is wrong with overprotected and fundamentally impotent European aviation. :td:

If you cannot imagine people paying money for crap service, maybe you should take a look at people paying crazy money for slow, dirty, crowded train services in UK.

:D Yes, true. BTW, I did not mean AF was facing insolvency, I was talking about being on strike being their habitual mode of operation.

I flew Aeroflot a lot, and I think that many reviewers have a positive impression because of their extremely low expectations. After what SU was ten years ago, I am sure passengers are pleased when no-one is punching them in the face during boarding :D And if you take an Airbus it will be superior to Tupolev or Yakovlev, even with the ugliest interior design in the world.

All I am saying is that the residual image and reputation of SU is a joke. Their improvement is slow and I think they will inflict a lot of damage to ST, publicity-wise, before they are regarded as a quality carrier.

True, true. However, I think in UK we economy travellers have the best of both worlds. I earn my BA miles through the proverbial biscuits and AmEx and Travelex and what not, but I tend to fly *A for earning miles through travel, because it is an insult flying BA to TYO and getting, er, 17 miles or something :mad:

Emphasis mine ... United Airlines - in Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. US Airways - in Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection (for the second time). Air Canada - in Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Ansett Australia - bankrupt and liquidated. Air NZ - 80% government buyout to protect from bankruptcy.

Yeah, you really have to admire the record of solvency in the Star Alliance.

Next time you want to sound like an old Russia/CIS hand, substitute Yakovlev for Ilyushin (as in "it will be superior to Tupolev or Ilyushin, etc"). SU doesn't fly a single scheduled route on a Yakovlev plane if my copy of their timetable is anything to go by.

SU mostly operates Airbus and Boeing aircraft on their European routes (with an odd Fokker thrown in for good measure on the morning run to VIE) and most people flying out of Moscow prefer their coach to that of their Western competitors for better amenities. Being based at MOW I still try not to fly SU (their ff programme is a joke). But let's be fair - apart from their serious image issues their are a) not worse than your average European airline on European routes b) the only half-decent option on intra-Russia/CIS routes c)no match to top quality Asian carriers on Asian routes

I don't get your irony my friend. :confused: I never said SU currently flies Yakovlevs. They used to. I used this particular name to say that what they do now is far superior to the horror of the past.

Out of interest: Yak-40 are still used by some babyflots, I flew one most recently in December 2003 from KHV to VVO (operated by Vladavia) and it was a sheer horror, not least because it was minus 30 outside and the thing was not heated prior to boarding. Even An-24 Antonov is much better.

I agree completely: APART FROM IMAGE ISSUES, they are not inferior to average European airline quality.

Yes, now that I think about it you're right.

I rubbed many ST fans the wrong way with my comments; I think I now know that it's just the matter of my distaste for AF which percolated to the whole ST ;)

Maybe we should separate the quality by classes. At least separate Economy from biz/first. For cheap economy, considering the miles earned, Star is the best followed by Skyteam, although individual airlines have somewhat different programs. OW shouldn't even be mentioned in this category as they suck for giving miles on cheap tickets.

For biz/first, OW has the great BA seats and decent service and the others follow...

BA's longhaul seats/service may be good but that clearly isn't enough for somebody wanting to fly from/to one of the many places OW doesn't cover sufficiently!
Edited to add: And remember that BA offers what probably is the least convenient hub in Europe; the overcrowded, zoo-like LHR and, for the few that can put up with LHR, has in store the LGW/LHR switch for extra enjoyment.

How true. Those of us living next to LHR and using it as a departure point often forget how diabolical London can be as a hub (don't get me started on LGW-LHR transfer; Tokyo Narita to Haneda is an effortless bliss by comparison).

But then if LHR is bad for BA passengers, spare a thought for those reduced to using T2. Now this must have been designed by someone hating tall people. Don't you just love checking in for an early-morning LH or OS flight? :mad:

Ask anyone on the AF forum, I am no friend of AF, I hate the airline, but in terms of comparison they must be included.

I don't get this? I'm tall and fly AF out of T2 often, but never early morning! The only thing I hate about T2 is the overcrowding and no decent food. But I usually just head for the AF lounge.

As for transiting LHR, I actually like it. When I used to fly BA monthly LAX-LHR-NCE I got used to the bus and quite enjoyed the shopping and the BA F or Concorde lounge. Later when they added the MB Spa it was great! I've transited LHR well over 100 times over the last several years and I've never had a significant problem other than one very long security queue during a holiday period. Now I know to avoid LHR when the holiday masses are coming or going. I only did the GTW-LHR transfer once and hired a taxi for that. It was expensive, but worth it to me.

I guess there is one thing I REALLY hate about LHR and that is how long it takes to drive there (with or without the M25/T5 construction), return my Avis car and take the bus to the terminal. It's about 5 times as long as doing the same at most other airports including LAX.

I meant check-in area where the celings are so low you can reach them with a raised elbow.

I'm glad to see this topic was not hijacked as so many others are. :rolleyes:

Chapter 11 doesn't apply to AC or within Canada. AC isn't a U.S. airline. It did file for CCAA reorganization (previously, the liquidating administrators would just have been called in).

i think EK will not join any alliance till the royalty highness will live. He said strongly EK wants ONLY bilateral codesharing, nothing else.

BTW, please Etihad is not a very good carrier.... :(

I agree with you 100%.
i can easily see which is the advantage for ST, but i cannot understand which would be the benefit for EK in joining ST.
Please, some one tell me which is the profit:-)

ehm.... EK does not have ANY codesharing agreement with SQ, UA or DL.
Joining an alliance means to codesharing some of your own flights


EK codesharing agreements:
(for Asia & Africa) TG, PR, SAA, AI, JL AI
(for EU & US) UL TG BA CO

EK SQ have only FFP affiliation!!!! the same is with: DL UA BA (ending) CO SQ JL SAA.

Air Canada and its US subsidiaries DID in fact file for Chapter 11 in addition to CCAA in order to protect the company's assets in the United States.

What does this have to do with Emirates????

and why it is funny?
 

despite all the criticism about Aeroflot and their domestic hardware, would it not be a certain advantage for ST above any other alliances if they will be able to provide SYSTEMATIC access to the territory sized as US plus Canada combined?
Would it not be an advantage if ST members will be able to get miles for flying SU?

Problem is, that in some cases you do not have any other option... well, almost - you can spend 4 days in train but I prefer flying.