Swiss in ONEWORLD?

RE: Swiss in ONEWORLD?

That makes sense. BA does benefit from IB’s latin America network, and Aer Lingus only serves a few cities in the U.S. I was wondering how many of SwissAir’s transatlantic routes have re-instated?

GD1

RE: Swiss in ONEWORLD?

I don’t wholly agree with the hub proximity argument.

You are right in pointing out the Dublin or Madird hubs being closer than Zurich, but I would at least make one point…

Iberia doesn’t have too much route overlap with BA. Apart from the big money transatlantic ones (JFK etc..) BA has a much wider North American network. Iberia by contrast, has a large Latin America network.

Aer Lingus is not a substantial transatlantic player, at least by comparison to Swiss. BA has often seen Lingus as a feeder carrier! Additionally, they are teetering on the edge of bankruptcy at the moment so are in no fit state to hurt BA.

RE: Swiss in ONEWORLD?

You are absolutely correct Mongu, and I knew you’d have a reaction to my more emotional rather than logical post(I usually stick to logic, I went off on a tangent here). If BA doesn’t want Swiss in the alliance for the reason of them being in some sort of economic dismay, I can understand that. Ansett surely left Star high and dry down under when they ‘went under.’ I mean, what is the status of the new Swiss anyway? Is it a shadow of the old Swiss, or has nothing do with? Isn’t CrossAir somehow involved? I don’t know. It seems to me however that the big issue is slots and relative proximity of Swiss’ hub airport. At least, that’s what I gathered from the post, I haven’t read the actual report. After all, BA, AA, and QF are the backbone of Oneworld, and I suppose they should have the most sayso, if indeed that is possible. I thought the purpose of any alliance is to benefit all players involved. In that instant, there may be some sort of sacrifice involved. I’m well aware that the problem at Heathrow extends much beyond BA’s involvement. However, I’m sure that for one of their alliance members, they could give in order to take. As far as London beyond close to Zurich, that’s weak. Isn’t London close to Madrid and Shannon, as well. Yet, Aer Lingus and Iberia are both in Oneworld. Was their relative proximity to Heathrow an issue back then?

GD1

RE: Swiss in ONEWORLD?

I suppose we have a different point of view greekdude!

From my perspective, BA is acting rationally. Heathrow is a blot on the UK economy, yet BA is stuck with it. It isn’t their fault that slots are so contstrained.

Also, BA are “morally” correct to oppose Swiss. BA is about the only airline in Europe that hasn’t been bailed out or subsidised by the state. Can you say the same about Swiss?

RE: Swiss in ONEWORLD?

Now, why does that not surprise me? BA not sacrificing it’s precious slots at Heathrow for the good of a potential member, and them veto-ing their membership because their hub airport is too close? This is shocking news…..NOT! I’m surprised BA has allowed any European airline to join Oneworld, to begin with. I figured any hub airport in Europe would be too close to Heathrow, in BA’s eyes. These are the very reasons why I despise BA, AA, and Oneworld. They should change the name of the alliance from Oneworld to BAworld. It would be more appropriate.

GD1

RE: Swiss in ONEWORLD?

There was an article in a Swiss newspaper today about there being a problem with (surprise surprise) slots at Heathrow if Swiss join oneworld.

I had previously read an article in the Basler Zeitung saying that BA may try to veto Swiss’ membership of oneworld, as BA feared Zurich was to close to Heathrow and may take custom off them, as there is a lot of overlap in routes.

RE: Swiss in ONEWORLD?

havent heard anything lately…last the news was that Swiss was on the final stages of discussion.