Switzerland’s national airline, Swiss, has formed a key agreement with Japan Airlines (JAL), ensuring a daily service between Tokyo and Zurich.
The deal, which was signed in Tokyo by JAL CEO Isao Kaneko and Swiss chairman Pieter Bouw, comes days after Swiss secured a similar accord with Quantas.
Bouw told swissinfo that Asia was the fastest growing aviation market and “that is why we are paying quite some attention to establishing bilateral relationships with the Asian carriers”.
Swiss said the “far-reaching partnership agreement”, which includes a code sharing arrangement, would come into effect on April 1.
It said the sharing of codes would strengthen the networks of the two carriers and improve customer convenience.
The two airlines hope to extend their cooperation further, Swiss said, by linking their frequent flier programmes in the near future.
Bouw said Asia currently accounted for some 25 per cent of Swiss’s revenues.
Positive
Aviation analyst, Sepp Moser, told swissinfo the deal was a positive development for Swiss.
But he said that, as a code sharing deal, it was not on the same level as a more wide-ranging agreement – dubbed a “strategic partnership” – already in place between Swiss and American Airlines.
“It is certainly a good agreement, like every partnership deal, but it is not far-reaching. It concerns only some of the weekly flights that they have, but not all of them.”
Oneworld
Swiss has been trying to join the Oneworld alliance which includes British Airways and American Airlines, but so far its overtures have been rebuffed.
Moser said Swiss’s strategy of signing individual agreements with other carriers was the next best option to joining an alliance.
“These bilateral agreements, of which there are many, are a kind of stop-gap measure until an alliance admittance can be achieved, but this will take a lot of time.”
Swiss pointed out that it now has “code share agreements with six of the Oneworld alliance partners (including American Airlines, British Airways and Aer Lingus)”.
A few days ago, Swiss reached an agreement with the Australian carrier, Quantas.
The code share deal covers daily flights on the Zurich to Sydney route, travelling via Frankfurt and Singapore which will come into force this summer. Swiss and Quantas also aligned their frequent flyer programmes.
Back in December last year, Swiss signed a deal with Finnair, following a similar accord with Iberia in November.
Moser commented that the JAL deal was likely to improve Swiss’s chances of joining Oneworld.
“JAL is not a member of Oneworld, but it is certainly very close to many members of Oneworld so this is certainly a step in the right direction.”
Joining Oneworld would allow Swiss to save costs through improved network coordination and joint marketing, as well as to boost passengers and raise profits.
Trips
In the period April 1 to May 31 and from October 1, JAL will operate three weekly round trip flights between Tokyo and Zurich with its own aircraft and crew, while Swiss will operate six weekly round trips between the two cities, Swiss said.
During the peak summer season, from June 1 to September 30, JAL will introduce daily flights and will code share with Swiss on two one-way flights, while Swiss will maintain its six weekly flights and code share on two one-way JAL flights, it said.
In the future the two airlines plan to extend the agreement to include domestic flights, flights between Japan and other parts of Asia, and flights from Zurich to other European cities.
JAL will use MD-11 aircraft with 233 seats on the Tokyo-Zurich flights, while Swiss will operate 240 seat MD-11s, Swiss said.
*********From swiss.com**********
By: mongu - 9th March 2003 at 11:31
That makes sense Saab.
So the regulators regard any cooperation between airlines as illegal, unless both airlines are granted immunity to work together?
In any case, I should have thought a tripartite legal agreement between BA, AA and Swiss should be able to be reached which will protect BA from having pax poached from LHR to ZRH.
By: Saab 2000 - 9th March 2003 at 09:47
Mongu,
I will try and explain what I mean to the best of my ability, I am not exactly aware of the major components of an ATI, but here it goes.
Swiss was granted ATI with AA in November of last year I gather. Now this means that AA and Swiss can codeshare on the North American routes and have unrestricted expansion of operations on North Atlantic routes under the Open Sky Agreement Switzerland has. Also, it enables the two airlines to co-ordinate their fares and launch joint marketing initiatives.
Now why is BA not happy with Swiss joining Oneworld? Well because we have to remember that BA couldn’t get ATI with AA. This means that Swiss has an advantage over BA: With AA it can develop its traffic across the Atlantic and take transfer passengers of BA at LHR to ZRH, which is a much less troublesome airport for connecting. Also, Swiss has no obstacles sitting in its track like BA who would find heavy penalties if it grew in partnership with AA. In the contrary, Swiss has room to grow. So, in my opinion BA has much more to lose if Swiss were to join Oneworld.
By: mongu - 8th March 2003 at 21:55
Saab, how do you mean that an AA-Swiss relationship would enjoy antitrust immunity?
PS – “antitrust” is clearly an Americanism and I’m not sure what it actually means. Is it linked to “anticompetitive” ?
By: Saab 2000 - 8th March 2003 at 09:47
Yeah I agree Swiss should join Oneworld. Bigger link up in Central Europe and they could ease conjestion at Heathrow by feeding through some of their operations down to Zurich.
I think the big thing is that American would like BA to push another European airline into Oneworld so that they can develop and integrate their relationship with Swiss through antitrust immunity.
By: KabirT - 8th March 2003 at 09:05
Originally posted by mongu
A oneworld hub at ZRH would attract continental passengers away from Star airlines like Lufthansa and Austrian, so I think BA may be a bit panicky by objecting too much.
agreed there.
By: mongu - 8th March 2003 at 01:15
A oneworld hub at ZRH would attract continental passengers away from Star airlines like Lufthansa and Austrian, so I think BA may be a bit panicky by objecting too much.
By: monster500 - 7th March 2003 at 22:59
Maybe with the guidance of JAS and QANTAS the new SWISS can be a more viable business.
By: Saab 2000 - 7th March 2003 at 18:12
I like how close Swiss and JAL seem to be getting to Oneworld. Sure do need some expansion to compete with Star who are the total opposite of Oneworld, expanson, expansion, expansion, whereas Oneworld is very cautious.
By: KabirT - 7th March 2003 at 15:53
I echo Monsters voice…..JAL and Qantas wont go dow that easy….but then who imagined Swissair would?
By: MapleLeaf_330 - 7th March 2003 at 15:39
Zurich has another big advantage as a hub over London (BA) in that its rail links throughout the continent are clearly a bigger advantage. I am sure like Frankfurt it has a big catchment. JAL won’t be going anywhere, neither will Qantas. These are both national carriers, one of a major world economy, and the other of reputation, history and cultural identity in the world.
my take on it.
By: Comet - 7th March 2003 at 14:26
A war would cause problems for most airlines
I don’t want to see any more airlines go the same way as Sabena. If QANTAS keep posting profits they will be okay of course, but if they had a sudden downturn things could get sticky. If there is a war, this could have a detrimental effect on most airlines as people will be very reluctant to travel. British Airways has already decided to cancel some routes owing to the threat in the Middle East, this will inevitably mean a loss of revenue in the short term for them, and there is talk of the withdrawal of Concorde (not before time, I think). It could be a difficult time for airlines if there is a war.
By: Bhoy - 7th March 2003 at 14:22
monster, the belgians are just a little sore about the role Swissair played in the downfall of Sabena…
Although why they’re holding it against SWISS, I dunno… Quite apart from the fact that SN was mismanaged for years before SR got involved…
By: monster500 - 7th March 2003 at 13:16
take alot to bring JAS down, its only the 3rd or 4th biggest airline company in the world.
And QANTAS is the most profitable airline in the skies atm.
By: Comet - 7th March 2003 at 13:11
Bad idea
Dealing with the SWISS – very bad idea indeed. Goodbye JAL and QANTAS!!!!
By: monster500 - 7th March 2003 at 13:07
IT’S QANTAS
Atleast spell it correctly.
By: Bhoy - 7th March 2003 at 01:08
Mongu, the rumour that comes up in Switzerland every time someone asks why Swiss isn’t in oneworld yet is that BA aren’t overly keen in having the extra major alliance hub in Zürich so close to Heathrow…
When you compare to the other major oneworld hubs in Europe, Dublin is really just a gateway to half a dozen Eastern US Seaboard destinations, Madrid/Barcelona are only really a gateway to South America (bearing in mind neither Iberia nor Aer Lingus operate to Asia at all), and Helsinki, too, is a relatively small hub.
Whether there’s any truth or not in ZRH being too close for BA’s liking, you can see certain advantages of using ZRH as a transit point for connecting oneworld passengers… decent(ish) networks, both within Europe, and longhaul; a more central location for European pax; just two terminals, a five minute moving walkway apart, rather than 4, two of which need busses to get anywhere near, etc, etc.
But, as the article says, Swiss already codeshares with all the major oneworld partners…
BA on the BSL-LHR flights,
AA on flights from ZRH to the states (both on LX flights, and the AA flights to JFK and DFW), and connections within the States, and within Europe
EI on ZRH-DUB, and DUB-LCY, LCY-ZRH, LCY-BSL and LCY-GVA flights
QF, as you say on flights to SYD
AY on the ZRH-HEL route
IB, on flights to Spain (I think?)
So, they’re involved with all the current oneworld members, except Cathay Pacific (LX already has a daily MD-11 flight from ZRH to HK, so they don’t nescessarily need extra capacity) and Lan Chile (LX only have two flights to South America… ZRH-SAO-BUE (5x a week) and ZRH-SAO-RIO (the other two days), so, again, no great need for connections.)
So, yes, I see them joining sooner or later, either way… especially now that they’ve had to lower their expectations as to how feasible making LX a truly major airline is.
By: mongu - 6th March 2003 at 22:17
I wonder why oneworld won’t take Swiss ?
By: Saab 2000 - 6th March 2003 at 21:26
Hahaha yes Frank…I get where your commin’ from.
By: frankvw - 6th March 2003 at 19:25
Hmmm, I guess JAL will be the next to go bankrupcy… }>
Sign In
March 6, 2003 at 7:18 pm