Why Isn't VS in *A?
 

With 49% ownership by SQ, VS should be an easy in into the *A. Is the only veto from BD? It would seem that BD has such limited int'l traffic and VS has such limited domestic UK or intra-EU traffic, both airlines would benefit considerably from VS's entry into the *A... as would most pax. Any other reason why VS isn't in the *A... or any alliance for that matter?

1Konsultant

I was under the impression that both UA and BD have vetoed VS while all other *A members where in favour
( this is a rumour - I have no source or reference to back it up - I believe that I actually read it on here on FT )

Makes good sense, especially with UA facing a domestic Virgin spring soon at SFO.

Can't see why BD would have veto'ed it. There is very little route overlap and, in any event, VS are a partner of BD's own FFP and they have codeshare agreements on a number of BD feed routes into LHR. There is also an agreement concerning the use of the VS club lounge at LHR for BD gold frequent flyers flying VS, so it is not as if BD would not want anything to do with VS.
I think it has more to do with VS being happy remaining outside an alliance for now and preferring bilaterals.

I wish they would join. That would be awesome!

Hmm, is Virgin American really part of Virgin though? Like, Virgin Blue and Virgin Atlantic aren't really "one" as far as I know, but I agree that if they were one it's obvious why UA doesn't want it.

Shame on UA if it is naive enough to think it's in the same class as VS. I suspect VS competes head-to-head with BA, and UA fights more with AA for customers. Given how much VS hates BA and how much UA hates AA, I would figure this would be a no-brainer. Oh well. One day...

Perhaps LH sees VS as a threat?

1Konsultant