npei

goodeats21

I have done that a bit anyway, with CX on separate tickets. Miss out on PQM/PQD, but as United is killing the value of 1K, not really a concern anymore.

UA_Flyer

adambrau

Accepting that all current *A stakeholders would be happy to welcome CX if the opportunity arose, would there be any regulatory bodies that could block it? If it were just an alliance change? It would make Star pretty powerful in Asia with NH, OZ, CA, BR, CX, SQ, TG, and I think one smaller Chinese carrier. Then UA and AC and NZ from the other side. I really have a hard time believing AA would force out CX for China Southern but the aviation world is in flux currently. TG seems to be a weak partner in terms of codeshares and management seems, how do I say it nicely, kind of corrupt? Would UA want CX - that's a lot of competition across the Pacific without a JV? A lot of potential flies in the soup but maybe if the Chinese Government supported CX to enter, the other Asian carriers would be loath to speak out? I guess we just have to see if China Southern comes to Oneworld and then how CX reacts.

CAPT Tee

To be able to use CX lounges in HKG as *G when flying UA alone is a big plus.

skidooman

That smaller Chinese carrier would be ZH, which is right across the bay from HKG. But they aren't competing for the same customers. And my understanding is that there is shares locking between CA and ZH.

Besides this, there is Juneyao - not a member, but some kind of *A partner - so there are more options out of Shanghai (where ST dominates because of MU).

CX defection to *A would mean that there isn't a single leading city in East Asia that is not a hub for *A. Beijing, Tokyo, Seoul, Taipei, Singapore, Bangkok, somewhat Shanghai, and now Hong Kong (on both sides of the bay), That would be impressive from an alliance standpoint. ST looks less nice with Seoul and Shanghai only (sure, they have VN but in my mind Vietnam doesn't yet have a city in these leagues), and OW would be equally restricted with Tokyo and Guangzhou (and MH, but in this case if you dare board).

Clear domination for *A. Question is, for how long? How many of these players would be truly happy and how many would be tempted to jump ship?

adambrau

Well if CX did come on board *A would be able to hit back at the inroads the ME3 have made between Asia and Europe. As someone mentioned CX TG and SQ are competing less between themselves now than the ME3, and adding BR OZ CA and NH plus LH LX SN OS, Star would be able to offer huge nonstop lift between Asia and Europe. Being super optimistic for a moment, a stronger AI would further the competition against the ME3 with added nonstops from India to Europe and the USA. And then for those who enjoy a stop midway or need to get to Africa/ME we also have TK based out of IST. Realistically Star might lose one of TG or OZ or BR but the amount of nonstop service with some very strong first-rate airlines could start to push back on the ME3? And that would be good for everyone who has, at an alarming rate, lost major traffic/yields to the ME3. Pretty much sums up most of these carriers. Bringing it back to UA, this scenario would allow for superlative connections for US-outbound/inbound pax via NRT, PEK, HKG and SIN across the Pacific. Obviously this is a simple scenario but it makes sense, and all the airlines listed here are probably sick of having the ME3 stealing their lunch!!!

swingaling

I'm pretty sure that the Canadian Competition Bureau would have a problem with CX joining *A because it would mean that all nonstop service between Canada and HKG would be operated by *A (AC & CX). The same could apply to Germany, New Zealand and South Africa, potentially.

The bigger issue is the costs of leaving OW and the costs of joining *A. CX is currently cutting expenditures to get their losses under control, so I don't see how it would make sense to switch alliances. It would only worsen their financial condition. And, honestly, how does switching alliances provide a material benefit to CX? *A pax might like it, but CX won't give a fig about that. As it stands, CX is free to make commercial agreements with non-OW members.

As others have mentioned, CX and CZ really are not in direct competition, despite their proximity. CZ is mainly a domestic carrier, while CX is mainly an international carrier. So, even if CZ joined OW, it does not necessarily follow that CX must leave.

jsloan

While YVR-HKG is a big market, it's not like it's the only place in Canada where *A would have a duopoly. When there's only one major national carrier -- WestJet doesn't really count for these purposes -- that'll happen. Also, an alliance doesn't mean a JV. Being alliance "partners" doesn't necessarily mean that you don't compete for the same customers (see: UA and SQ).

As for why it would benefit CX -- there must be a financial benefit to these alliances or they wouldn't exist. While they can (and do) partner with non-alliance airlines, many customers will try to stay within an alliance in order to accrue benefits. So, if they think they can get more customers by gaining better access to *A customers, at the cost of giving up some access to OW customers, they'll do so. Besides, it seems that a lot of this rumor is predicated on CX being forced out of OW in favor of CZ. It's hard for me to imagine that being independent would be better for them than joining *A in that scenario.

adambrau

OK that makes sense. Have the 'expensive' fuel hedges CX took on now ended? I understand that was a bet gone really bad.

I guess antitrust JV agreements allowed like AC-LH-UA on the Atlantic and UA-NH on the Pacific won approval because there is enough competition. It seems like CX wouldn't get approval to join Star with more protective countries (like Canada) unless more competition were to develop.

Let's see what happens if China Southern moves to Oneworld, and how CX reacts. Until then its all pretty hypothetical. Too bad!

Duke787

Do the competition committees have any say in airlines joining alliances?? They could certainly challenge any resulting JV or codeshare proposals but can they really stop the airlines from being in the same alliance?

Plus on the Canada example, AC and CX already have a partnership that is akin to being in the same alliance that was announced last year including codeshares on all the Canada - HKG routes

drewguy

Assuming the IAD-HKG rumor has some legs?

Cathay Pacific to launch direct flights from Hong Kong to Washington, with journey taking under 17 hours | South China Morning Post

Certainly would be nice to be *A (although I'd hoped UA would run this route, especially with 787 base moving to IAD).

What is the timing of flights? Is it late afternoon HKG departure (arrives night IAD) with a turn for evening/night departure arriving mid/late afternoon in HKG?

seawolf

As if one rumour thread is not enough, we now have two?

YYC1986

Wow hope this doesn't turn out to be true

Kmxu

We will know whether or not the rumor on the other thread is true very soon. The rumor on this thread has been around for a long time and won't be confirmed for a while.