Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Why Isn't VS in *A?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 20, 2007 | 1:38 am
  #1  
Original Poster
1M
50 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: SFO, IAH
Programs: UA MM, Marriott Lifetime Plat, Hertz #1 Gold
Posts: 437
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
1Konsultant is offline  
Old Jun 20, 2007 | 1:52 am
  #2  
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: New Zealand
Programs: NZ , QF , MK
Posts: 1,386
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 )
kiwiandrew is offline  
Old Jun 20, 2007 | 5:17 pm
  #3  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 11,874
Makes good sense, especially with UA facing a domestic Virgin spring soon at SFO.
cesco.g is offline  
Old Jun 20, 2007 | 6:07 pm
  #4  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,881
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.
NickB is offline  
Old Jun 20, 2007 | 8:26 pm
  #5  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 23,999
I wish they would join. That would be awesome!

Originally Posted by cesco.g
Makes good sense, especially with UA facing a domestic Virgin spring soon at SFO.
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.
lucky9876coins is offline  
Old Jun 20, 2007 | 8:44 pm
  #6  
Original Poster
1M
50 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: SFO, IAH
Programs: UA MM, Marriott Lifetime Plat, Hertz #1 Gold
Posts: 437
Originally Posted by kiwiandrew
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 )
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
1Konsultant is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.