IamHungry

I would rather redeem AA miles to fly premium cabin on CX. UA chagres too much for I and O tickets....

swingaling

Whatever else occurs, CX won't be forced out. The rumors are based on the contention that CX would leave OW in protest in the event that a Chinese carrier is admitted to OW. I personally don't buy this argument.

I don't think anyone is arguing that CX would become independent. Rather the assumption is that in the event of CX leaving OW, *A would be the natural place for them to go (mainly based on their relationship with CA).

jsloan

Angrily leaving OW due to CZ and then joining *A, which has ZH, makes no sense to me. I suppose CZ has TPAC flights and ZH doesn't, but then again CA is launching LAX-SZX service so the same principle applies.

Halo117

Well the way UA allows for CX on their website and the cold shoulder to SQ, you would only know who is *A by the partner link. Frankly what would CX in *A add that you can't do now? Tired of the animal farm way *A is structured...some carriers are more equal than others...then u have these fringe partners that compete directly with *A.

just make sure CX signs a prenup.

Kacee

Awards on CX metal and *G access to the fabulous CX lounges are two huge benefits that immediately come to mind.

I think this is all fantasy though.

cur

TG for CX for sure...but SQ? rearry?

Xiaotung

ZH recently joined CX's FFP and is partly owned by CA.

jsloan

*A is a marketing alliance, not a joint venture. Equality isn't the point. The other alliances are structured the same way; UA and CX's close relationship makes just as little sense from a OW point of view as it does from a *A point of view. And the "cold shoulder to SQ" has as much (or more) to do with SQ than it does with UA. In fact, based upon the way they treat *A lounge access and partner award inventory, I'd argue that SQ wants as little as possible to do with *A.

As a customer, in theory, I would prefer that *A operate more like a giant JV in order to open up flight options where I can use my benefits. A flight segment on a non-*A airline feels like "wasted money," but there's only so much of a premium I'm willing to pay before an all-*A itinerary feels like "wasted money" too. In practice, though, if this were to come to pass, I think international travel turns into an oligopoly similar to the domestic US market.

And, as was pointed out, MileagePlus award flights on CX would definitely be a nice benefit to have, as would CX lounge access. For that matter, it would be nice to be able to earn PQMs and PQDs on CX flights. Even with the current structure of the PQD program, requiring 016 tickets, the fact that UA lists so many CX connections on its website means that PQD earning would be a real possibility on many CX routes.

Ah, good point. Still, if CX were to make this move voluntarily, it seems like it would have more to do with wanting to be closer to CA than being upset about CZ.

Kacee

The whole "CX would leave OW because they're pissed about CZ joining" sounds to me like classic internet forum speculation with no basis in reality.

emcampbe

Perhaps it would allow CX to through check in to UA flights, which it can't do now (yes, still pissed about nearly missing a connection to EWR on UA due to this almost a year ago - there should at least be a notification if UA is going to sell this).

I don't believe this is the case...I believe the codesharing is putting AC codes on CX flights beyond HKG to other south asian cities, and CX codes on AC's flights to Canadian cities beyond YVR/YYZ, and allows earning on them. But they aren't codesharing on any Canada (YVR/YYZ-HKG and vv.) flgihts. At least that's how I read this press release on it.

I think you're confusing JVs and alliances, and sounds even like you are insinuating they are the same thing. They're not. Alliances are basically a marketing partnerships between the carriers, which as part of it, allows customers on one carrier to accrue miles on another. Through flights doesn't even require an alliance, just an interline agreement. JVs are where the airlines can basically 'collude' to jointly set prices, schedules, fares and completely market flights together. A JV eliminates competition between carriers, but an alliance keeps it, because while one may be able to book a flight on airline A on airline B's website, or earn miles on airline A while flying on airline B, A and B both independently build their own schedules, independently decide on capacity, independently file pricing, etc., and in effect, is no different than how they compete, with say, other airlines in different alliances.

jsloan

This has nothing to do with the alliance and everything to do with their backend systems. UA and CX could make this work; they've chosen not to do so. It's not nearly as unusual as you imply; I've found through check-int to be the exception, not the rule, although I admit that I haven't tried frequently. IMO, your experience was due to a senselessly strict interpretation of the rules by HKG security and an inexplicable failure of UA to staff their transfer desk appropriately. (Also, online check-in with UA probably should have worked at that point -- but honestly, HKG security should have let you through with a receipt when they saw that the transfer desk was closed).

Anyway, I suppose you could argue that being in the same alliance might motivate them to align their back-end systems, but I have my doubts.

I believe you mean "through fares" here, not "through flights" -- there's no such thing as a through (direct -- think the Island Hopper) flight with a change of carrier. But, yes, you're right -- your BKK-EWR trip was likely on a through fare, as UA loves to partner with CX for those short-hauls. All the airlines need to do is agree how to split the revenue on those flights and they can be filed.

adambrau

😅😭Thank you for that, I am well versed in the differences of JV's, Alliances and other one off agreements between two airlines, like UA and CX do out of Hongkong. I worked for Swissair at JFK before it went bust, I have been a Mileage Plus member for 26 years, and aviation has always been a hobby. I have lived in Hong Kong, the USA and Britain during the course of my life. The aviation landscape is fast a-changing. Sorry if my enthusiasm over a topic that is actually interesting to me is lost in "definitions"

username

Isn't CX in pretty bad shape? Would that be something to do when an airline is in such condition? Isn't *A already too strong in Asia and the existing partners (NH, OZ, BR to the north and SQ, TG to the south) would oppose?

Probably a posturing thing, right?

Xiaotung

Are we closer to this scenario now that CZ is about to leave SkyTeam and many sources are saying oneworld for them is a matter of time?

mahasamatman

I still think the odds are near zero. The existing Asian partners won't let it happen.