Rumor: CX to leave OW for Star: UA implications?
UA Exec meeting today at IAD had talks CX to leave OW when IAD is launched and announce *A. What does this mean for UA?
btw that first suite!!!!! |
I don't see this happening, though I would gladly swap SQ for CX.
|
source? because the OP of the a.net thread i read this rumor on earlier spelled qantas "quantas" in the same post. i'm calling #fakenews
EFC: i can see CX joining *A at some point, mainly because of their CA ties. this is nothing new. what i'm doubting is that (a) this change is imminent, and (b) it was divulged at this alleged meeting at IAD. |
This rumor's been floating in and out for quite some time.
|
Believe it when I see it, but more partners is never(?) a bad thing...
|
Airline industry braces for China Southern exit from Skyteam alliance, setting up clash with Cathay Pacific | South China Morning Post
That is as good a version of the story as any of the crap floating around. The theory is that China Southern has to leave SkyTeam to partner with AA now that American owns a small chunk and once that happens (and CZ moves into OW) that CX will leave because it doesn't want to be competing just across the border with another OW member. Putting aside that the two airlines don't really compete for the same passengers today despite their closely located hubs there are plenty of reasons to think it is reasonable or stupid. As for the impact on UA, if CX joins *A then figure some code-share beyond Hong Kong (but not into mainland China) as well as on the US side. In other words, exactly what the AA/CX relationship looks like today. That said, UA still have the NH JV (and CX won't be in a JV because no open skies and China isn't going to change that any time soon) so I'd bet the cheaper fares, at least for JV markets, would still mostly be on UA/NH metal. As to the F suite rave by the OP, are you thinking of CX or the new SQ or EK suite? |
Originally Posted by sbm12
(Post 29175046)
Airline industry braces for China Southern exit from Skyteam alliance, setting up clash with Cathay Pacific South China Morning Post
That is as good a version of the story as any of the crap floating around. The theory is that China Southern has to leave SkyTeam to partner with AA now that American owns a small chunk and once that happens (and CZ moves into OW) that CX will leave because it doesn't want to be competing just across the border with another OW member. Putting aside that the two airlines don't really compete for the same passengers today despite their closely located hubs there are plenty of reasons to think it is reasonable or stupid. As for the impact on UA, if CX joins *A then figure some code-share beyond Hong Kong (but not into mainland China) as well as on the US side. In other words, exactly what the AA/CX relationship looks like today. That said, UA still have the NH JV (and CX won't be in a JV because no open skies and China isn't going to change that any time soon) so I'd bet the cheaper fares, at least for JV markets, would still mostly be on UA/NH metal. As to the F suite rave by the OP, are you thinking of CX or the new SQ or EK suite? |
Originally Posted by jmanirish
(Post 29175072)
That's would be my 'fear', assuming this even happens. They'd be in the alliance, but good luck being able to get a decent fare on a 016 ticket (like how SK, etc. get no love because of the LH JV tie up).
UA is in many ways closer to CX than it is to TG, which will only allow UA to sell full fare tix on UA stock. |
Originally Posted by Kacee
(Post 29175101)
Though CX and UA already do have a fairly robust codeshare relationship, with discount throughfares (to BKK, for example) often available via HKG.
UA is in many ways closer to CX than it is to TG, which will only allow UA to sell full fare tix on UA stock. |
Originally Posted by jmanirish
(Post 29175118)
Ah interesting. Didn't even realize that (shows how often I'm flying that direction)
|
Originally Posted by Kacee
(Post 29175101)
UA is in many ways closer to CX than it is to TG
|
The flight timings for the IAD to HKG flight do not offer much connectivity ex-IAD (late evening arrival into IAD). This is similar to CX's HKG-EWR flight.
|
No loss, no gain. CX is not an alliance player. Look at how crummy the mileage earnings are on CX. I think all CX wants are codeshares, not full alliance participation.
Before anyone mentions SkyTeam, I highly doubt that CX would even consider ST since MU is too close. |
Originally Posted by sbm12
(Post 29175046)
Airline industry braces for China Southern exit from Skyteam alliance, setting up clash with Cathay Pacific South China Morning Post
That is as good a version of the story as any of the crap floating around. The theory is that China Southern has to leave SkyTeam to partner with AA now that American owns a small chunk and once that happens (and CZ moves into OW) that CX will leave because it doesn't want to be competing just across the border with another OW member. Putting aside that the two airlines don't really compete for the same passengers today despite their closely located hubs there are plenty of reasons to think it is reasonable or stupid. As for the impact on UA, if CX joins *A then figure some code-share beyond Hong Kong (but not into mainland China) as well as on the US side. In other words, exactly what the AA/CX relationship looks like today. That said, UA still have the NH JV (and CX won't be in a JV because no open skies and China isn't going to change that any time soon) so I'd bet the cheaper fares, at least for JV markets, would still mostly be on UA/NH metal. As to the F suite rave by the OP, are you thinking of CX or the new SQ or EK suite? i saw the airliners thread, made a call over to IAD and there was an Exec meeting so this seems pretty true at least UA are talking about it. |
That would kill one world is Asia. They already have no China presence. To lose HKG seems almost like the death of One World.
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 3:51 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.