QR To Join An Alliance Within Next 12 Months

LX138 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 8:56 am

Confirmed by their CEO: http://www.travelweekly.com.au/trave...-to-join-alliance-within-12-months

bill142 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:17 am

It will be oneworld.

[Edited 2012-07-04 02:20:52]

mikey72 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:18 am

Whatever happens.....once one goes.........

Be interesting that's for sure.

(better dust off those handbags boys)

CHRISBA777ER · Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:19 am

I'll be absolutely delighted if QR joint OneWorld.

Makes a lot of sense i think.

RAGAZZO777 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:19 am

Interesting development. Now the question is: will it be Star Alliance or Oneworld ?

PM · Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:21 am

Quoting mikey72 (Reply 2):
Whatever happens.....once one goes.........

I can see Etihad following but I doubt if Emirates would. In fact, would an alliance want Emirates...? It's a bit like inviting a gorilla to share your taxi.

LOWS · Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:49 am

Quoting Bill142 (Reply 1):
It will be oneworld.

Surely, EY would be OneWorld's desired partner. Especially after their investment in AB.

ba319-131 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:00 am

I actually envisaged EY joining OW and QR as a likely *A member, interesting times regardless.

Burj · Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:02 am

Quoting LOWS (Reply 6):
Surely, EY would be OneWorld's desired partner. Especially after their investment in AB.

Actually wasn't there just a post with a link to a French article saying that AF/KLM was going to work much closer with EY... Maybe a prelude to EY joining SkyTeam?

bill142 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:38 am

Quoting ba319-131 (Reply 7):
I actually envisaged EY joining OW and QR as a likely *A member, interesting times regardless.

Given Etihads alliance with Virgin Australia, I doubt Qantas would support it.

Qazar · Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:05 am

Funny... I thought Qatar was a LH partner... But it still shows that it is partner with ANA, Asiana, United and US Airways... I guess that qualifies it more for Star Alliance than OneWorld in my book...

... And since Etihad owns AirBerlin, I guess I would agree with LOWS is saying that it would make sense that Etihad is more the candidate for OneWorld!

Quoting PM (Reply 5):
In fact, would an alliance want Emirates...? It's a bit like inviting a gorilla to share your taxi.

Love that comment... And couldn't agree more!

nzrich · Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:13 am

Looks like QF and QR are getting cosy
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/business...rways/story-fn7j19iv-1226417059948

CHRISBA777ER · Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:16 am

Anyone else thinking EY and QR to Oneworld?

TYCOON · Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:19 am

Given the confirmation in the press of a pending agreement to pool revenue on selected flights between EY and AF/KL, I say if EY goes anywhere it will be Skyteam, and then AB would leave OneWorld and move to Skyteam.

aeroblogger · Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:25 am

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 12):
Anyone else thinking EY and QR to Oneworld?

No way both would end up in the same alliance.

CHRISBA777ER · Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:40 am

Quoting aeroblogger (Reply 14):
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 12):
Anyone else thinking EY and QR to Oneworld?

No way both would end up in the same alliance.

Sure? Why not?

I fail to see what the difference is betwen those two and TG and SQ in the same alliance?

Traffic patterns and markets very similar, same business models, same hub strategy, similar yield profile and similar targets.

Both are distinct countries, some distance apart. Same with QR and EY.

EY and QR both have captive O&D markets serving their own cities, but also have much larger transit pax markets. Some degree of rationalisation on some transit pax routes all but inevitable for the Gulf carriers, so why cant it take place under an alliance umbrella?

QR not as strong as EY into Aus, whereas QR much stronger than EY into Asia. Under OneWorld think of EY as QF’s partner, and QR as CX and MH’s.

Given how strong EK are and are likely to get, surely the Gulf carriers need to ask what they want to get out of an alliance – why cant they be in an alliance together?

Half hourly shuttles on a mixture of QR/EY metal between DOH and AUH feeding their own and OneWorld partners flights out of both hubs?

Given that its looking unlikely OneWorld will have an Indian partner - why not just take a massive chunk of the into-India market instead?

Seriously, why cant it work?

[Edited 2012-07-04 05:00:22]

mikey72 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:41 am

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 12):
Anyone else thinking EY and QR to Oneworld?

I was actually but 'daren't' say it....

OEH68 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:14 pm

QR in OneWorld would be fantastic! I like their product very much, their service is amazing.

mikey72 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:47 pm

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 15):
Seriously, why cant it work?

It can work.

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 15):
Given how strong EK are and are likely to get, surely the Gulf carriers need to ask what they want to get out of an alliance – why cant they be in an alliance together?

EY and QR in the same alliance might not stop EK in its tracks but it would certainly make them look back over their shoulder.

If EY and QR want to maximize the impact of their ops on EK in terms of competition then this is the way to do it.

migair54 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:53 pm

There´s another thread talking about close cooperation between QR and QF so that make me think that they will join oneworld.

We can see nice connectivity with IB in MAD T-4 to Latin-America and some parts of USA. That would be fantastic for QR in LHR to USA as well as HKG to China and Japan.

CHRISBA777ER · Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:23 pm

Quoting mikey72 (Reply 16):

Quoting mikey72 (Reply 18):
Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 15):
Seriously, why cant it work?

It can work.

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 15):
Given how strong EK are and are likely to get, surely the Gulf carriers need to ask what they want to get out of an alliance – why cant they be in an alliance together?

EY and QR in the same alliance might not stop EK in its tracks but it would certainly make them look back over their shoulder.

If EY and QR want to maximize the impact of their ops on EK in terms of competition then this is the way to do it.

As usual you and I on same page Mikey.

Imagine how powerful OneWorld would be on the UK/Europe/USA - India/Pakistan traffic then. Compelling indeed.

We'd certainly see the demise of BA metal into AUH and DOH (do they even still fly there?) but funelling BA/BD's UK and Euro short-haul feed through QR and EY's LHR shuttles (A380s anyone?) would strengthen their position considerably.

Longer term you can then start looking at ceasing Aus/NZ flights on QR metal, but adding QF and QR flight numbers to the EY flights ex-AUH.

Oneworld then has an Austrategy - you have a lot of premium seats down under, and a lot of Y seats that can be more profitably carried ex-AUH for the really low yielding Y tourist class stuff.

Not saying its likely, just think its a lot more possible than people think.

MillwallSean · Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:35 pm

EY is from Abu Dhabi. Abu Dhabi is ruled by a francophile. France has always had tight connections with the emirs there hence naval base etc. Ey will move to skyteam after the emir has told management what he wants.

With the recent tie up between AF/KL and EY, and its a substantial agreement plus that they have the intent of using AB in partnership with AF/KL and a few more things, Id say EY is unlikely to be moving towards oneworld. Skyteam seems more likely and I wouldn't be surprised to see AB follow suit.

QR to oneworld absolutely possible. Seems a good choice by QR.

aeroblogger · Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:38 pm

I'd expect (speculation) to see EY go to *S and QR go to *O.

I think LH learned its lesson when it let TK in - I wouldn't expect any more gulf carriers in *A.

LX138 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:38 pm

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 20):
Not saying its likely, just think its a lot more possible than people think.

Yeah I don't think all of that is actually likely! Although if it went through, some of it would work.

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 20):
We'd certainly see the demise of BA metal into AUH and DOH (do they even still fly there?)

Why do you think that would happen? (And yes they still fly there).

SASDC8 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:42 pm

If partners are any sign, I am quite sure QR will join Star.

But seeing that this is QR, with their "big mouthed" management style, I guess any alliance is possible. Heck given his ego, QR might even start their own alliance

aaexecplat · Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:51 pm

It will be OW. QR and UA just discontinued their partnerships/codesharing and QR will no longer be bookable on UA awards. They are pulling away from UA. Highly unlikely that they would join *. OW makes the most sense for many reasons.

EK413 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:09 pm

Quoting RAGAZZO777 (Reply 4):
Now the question is: will it be Star Alliance or Oneworld ?

I'll say OW...

Quoting LOWS (Reply 6):
Surely, EY would be OneWorld's desired partner. Especially after their investment in AB.

EY have jumped into bed with VA & AB... VA have jumped into bed with NZ, SQ and DL even though DL is a Skyteam member I highly doubt EY would consider OW...

Quoting ba319-131 (Reply 7):
I actually envisaged EY joining OW and QR as a likely *A member, interesting times regardless.

I'll place money on EY joining * Alliance while QR join OW...

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 12):
Anyone else thinking EY and QR to Oneworld?

That would be sweet but could the Alliance handle 3 Middle Eastern carriers?

Quoting TYCOON (Reply 13):
AB would leave OneWorld and move to Skyteam.

AB recently became a member of the OW Alliance...

Based on all the facts presented I would be placing a bet on QR to join OW and that would be sweet!!

EK413

aznmadsci · Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:11 pm

Quoting Qazar (Reply 10):
But it still shows that it is partner with ANA, Asiana, United

As mentioned UA and QR are no longer partners. Yet, that does not mean much and it could all change again.

Quoting aeroblogger (Reply 22):
I think LH learned its lesson when it let TK in - I wouldn't expect any more gulf carriers in *A.

What does that mean? Does that apply to MS too?

vincewy · Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:44 pm

So it looks like -

QR - OW
EY - ST
*A - well it already has TK so I don't know if there's any benefit (even if it's marginal) of another one.

Now what will happen to other remaining carriers like WY (god forbid if this one is gone, my fav boutique airlines), KU, and GF?

EK413 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:59 pm

Quoting aznmadsci (Reply 27):
What does that mean?

I guess what he is indicating is a similar scenario with SQ being a * member however not cooperating with other partners and same goes for TK.... I'm just making an assumption...

EK413

TWA772LR · Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:16 pm

Im putting my money on star. I know they codeshare with US on DOH-IAH and UA on IAH-DCA. Interesting times ahead.

LAXdude1023 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:10 pm

Quoting TWA772LR (Reply 30):

Im putting my money on star. I know they codeshare with US on DOH-IAH and UA on IAH-DCA. Interesting times ahead.

Given they just terminated all agreements with United, Star is doubtful.

ASA · Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:27 pm

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 31):
Given they just terminated all agreements with United, Star is doubtful.

I agree. Also, why would TK want QR in Star Alliance???
... they are pretty much competing head-to-head for US, Europe, Africa, and Far East flights.

Viscount724 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:16 pm

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 15):
I fail to see what the difference is betwen those two and TG and SQ in the same alliance?

Traffic patterns and markets very similar, same business models, same hub strategy, similar yield profile and similar targets.

I disagree with your TG/SQ comments. They are very different carriers. BKK is largely a low-yield tourist destination in contrast to SIN which is one of the world's major financial centers. TG has thus always had much lower yields than SQ due to far less business traffic. Just look at their profitability over the years in comparison with SQ.

TG has also suffered from too much government interference for many years, with their CEO and other senior executives usually changing after every election.

leftyboarder · Wed Jul 04, 2012 7:12 pm

Quoting EK413 (Reply 29):
I guess what he is indicating is a similar scenario with SQ being a * member however not cooperating with other partners and same goes for TK.... I'm just making an assumption...

EK413

It is not about TK not cooperating closely with LH/UA/SQ etc but rather competing directly with LH for the market between Americas and Europe to anywhere east. LH prefers to route passengers over its network for obvious reasons. When they let TK in, TK was more of a regional feeder a la OS to the vast LH network especially to the USA. Obviously they have outgrown that role now.

smbukas · Wed Jul 04, 2012 7:36 pm

Quoting aeroblogger (Reply 22):
I think LH learned its lesson when it let TK in - I wouldn't expect any more gulf carriers in *A.

AFAIK, LH is happy having TK in *A. They see TK as a good competitor for MEB3. Keep your competitors close to you - that is the strategy which sometimes work.

Of course, this is not the reason Qatar airways should enter *A.

boeing773er · Wed Jul 04, 2012 8:18 pm

Quoting SASDC8 (Reply 24):

Hahahahahahah, I laughed so hard about that because I can just imagine him launching his own alliance. It would be called the "Ego" alliance.

idlewildchild · Wed Jul 04, 2012 8:22 pm

Why do they show when I check availability for miles JNB-JFK as part of Star ALliance? Aren'tthey in STAR already?

kl911 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:30 pm

Why is everybody hoping that they will join Oneworld or Star? Dont forget about Skyteam. I honestly hope they or EY will join Sky.

aerorobnz · Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:48 pm

The airline industry is rather topsy-turvy as airlines do whatever they think will keep them profitable.
The way the alliance members of all the big 3 are shacking up with non-members all over the world. buying shares in non-members and merging with airlines from other alliances who really knows which way they will go.

Selfishly, I'd like to see them in Star Alliance as that is the alliance I have the most points with and QR often have the best deals to the places I fly to. They are surrounded by TK/ET but they have a better network downunder. Oh and I would like to see QR buy the stake in NZ when the government sells it. Pipe dreams and all that..

runway23 · Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm

Quoting leftyboarder (Reply 34):
It is not about TK not cooperating closely with LH/UA/SQ etc but rather competing directly with LH for the market between Americas and Europe to anywhere east. LH prefers to route passengers over its network for obvious reasons. When they let TK in, TK was more of a regional feeder a la OS to the vast LH network especially to the USA. Obviously they have outgrown that role now.

One can wonder if it had to be redone today, whether TK would once again opt for Star and be accepted into Star. At this stage they would probably gain just as much in oneworld than Star.

ZKOJH · Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:33 pm

Star alliance have already said they are NOT talking to any of the airlines from the gulf area, would be nice to see them get QR but think its a no starter!

going on what is on 'Wikipedia' I know it's not the best, could see a right shake up, QR in OW, EK in Star and Etihad in ST haha tho the last 2 are very good dreams.

delta2ual · Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:22 am

I would be very surprised if any of the three big ME carriers joined Star (as much as I would like them too). I think Turkish Airlines (which is a great airline) has very ambitious growth plans, and I'm not sure how they would "gel" with Qatar or Etihad. I doubt Emirates will join any alliance. My gut tells me that AF/KL convince Etihad to join SkyTeam, and Qatar joins oneworld. Of course, Etihad owns part of Air Berlin right? Air Berlin belong to oneworld. So, I guess anything could happen!

Sydscott · Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:31 am

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 15):
QR not as strong as EY into Aus, whereas QR much stronger than EY into Asia. Under OneWorld think of EY as QF’s partner, and QR as CX and MH’s.

EY is Virgins partner. Lets be honest, both QR and EY are getting substantial traffic shares from Australia's relatively liberal regulatory environment. That's how EK elso built it's business. Given that EY and QF used to have an arrangement, and EY walked away from it to form an Alliance with Virgin, I doubt that EY would be supported by QF. A joint QF/QR relationship could use Australia's 14 available frequencies to Doha plus what QR already has to expand the market. QF then gets 1 stop coverage of alot of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa that it doesn't have on QR. Whereas EY would have to terminate the Virgin Australia relationship it's build up, not to mention divest its shareholding in them.

Quoting MillwallSean (Reply 21):
QR to oneworld absolutely possible. Seems a good choice by QR.

I think it's the best choice. Frankly I think EY should keep doing what they're doing and mirror EK but not going into an allinace but by building lots of bi-lateral relationships.

Sydscott · Thu Jul 05, 2012 4:11 am

Quoting avek00 (Reply 46):
I mean those carriers make an utter mockery of the basic premises underlying the entire paradigm of international route authorities.

The basic premise of international route authorities is to get people from point A to point B as efficiently as possible while facilitating passengers choice in how they do it, how much they pay for it and in what class they travel. That's exactly what EK, QR, EY etc do.

lightsaber · Thu Jul 05, 2012 7:06 am

I think QR is looking for the best deal. IMHO, this will be a tough negotiation for any alliance that wants them (which all three should).

Quoting mikey72 (Reply 2):
Whatever happens.....once one goes.........

Be interesting that's for sure.

Yes it will be.
1. It forces EY to pick an alliance quickly.
2. It puts the Indian airlines in a weaker position. However, any alliance that picks up QR and either 9W or 6E will be in a very good position.

Quoting ba319-131 (Reply 7):
I actually envisaged EY joining OW and QR as a likely *A member, interesting times regardless.

I thought that too, but apparently QR is looking for a 'better deal' than *A is offering.

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 12):
Anyone else thinking EY and QR to Oneworld?

That would be a *very* wise move for OW.

Quoting vincewy (Reply 28):
*A - well it already has TK so I don't know if there's any benefit (even if it's marginal) of another one.

If *A gains QR, then it 'sandwiches' EK and allows *A to neutralize the 'Gorilla.' While this would hurt TK a little, it would overall strengthen the alliance. In particular if *A also picks up an Indian partner such as 9W. This would be a HUGE win potentially for *A.

Or... OW could pick up QR and 9W and they would have the region pretty well done except for TK being a thorn in their side...

QR putting itself up for bid for an alliance is a very wise move on their part. They had better make the most of it quickly. No one will put up with them being undecided too long. So setting a public 12 month deadline is a great move.

We really need a popcorn smilie here on a.net...

Lightsaber

avek00 · Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:07 pm

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 44):
The basic premise of international route authorities is to get people from point A to point B as efficiently as possible

No, it's not. From the beginning, the international route authority regime was NEVER intended for the likes of EK/EY/QR to do what they do. They make an utter mockery of the longstanding idea that international route authorities are to primarily enable a country's airlines to service the transportation needs of its own home market. Sure, everyone offers connections that enable onward journeys to third countries, but doing so is supposed to remain peripheral to servicing the home market -- and for most of the world's respected carriers, that's exactly how they operate to this day over much of their international network (and even where that premise is arguably deviated from, it often has a practical basis in geographic constraints, such as the UA/DL/QF hub/focus city operations). These days, the mideast parasitic carriers don't even pretend that their myriad services are first and foremost intended to cater to travelers heading to/from DXB/AUH/DOH.

Sydscott · Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:36 pm

Quoting avek00 (Reply 46):
From the beginning, the international route authority regime was NEVER intended for the likes of EK/EY/QR to do what they do.

Considering they've merely copied what airlines such as SQ and CX have done that argument really doesn't hold much water.

Quoting avek00 (Reply 46):
They make an utter mockery of the longstanding idea that international route authorities are to primarily enable a country's airlines to service the transportation needs of its own home market.

Yes and no. International route authorities are there both to grow the home market AND to enhance competition on other markets. That's why you have various forms of freedoms, (ie 5th, 7th etc) that are negotiated alongside them.

Quoting avek00 (Reply 46):
(and even where that premise is arguably deviated from, it often has a practical basis in geographic constraints, such as the UA/DL/QF hub/focus city operations).

In the case of SIN, the Singapore Government has actively tried to make Changi the premier airport in the region for connections and they've been very successful. Their tolerance to something like Jetstar Asia is a testament to that considering it is, for all intents and purposes, controlled by Qantas. In the case of UA and DL, the only reason they have the rights they do is because it was imposed on Japan after World War 2. Try negotiating something similar now and see how far you get.

Quoting avek00 (Reply 46):
These days, the mideast parasitic carriers don't even pretend that their myriad services are first and foremost intended to cater to travelers heading to/from DXB/AUH/DOH.

And nor do they need to thanks to the various forms of rights that Governments have granted them to grow. The fact is someone like EK does an awesome job of getting pax from A to B in comfort. If other airlines could compete with that then they would. The fact that alot of them can't, and have been forced to up their game because of it, is a good thing for the industry as a whole!

lightsaber · Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:13 pm

Quoting avek00 (Reply 46):
Sure, everyone offers connections that enable onward journeys to third countries, but doing so is supposed to remain peripheral to servicing the home market

EK is constrained by bilarals. Many of the secondary markets they enter need the connections. For example, why would Poland constrain QR or EK? WAW will need those connections.

Japan had DL and UA opening them up post WW2. Ironically, Japan economically benefited from that relationship as there was no fighting opening trade routes.

No one holds a gun to anyone's head signing them. Germany has enforced two provisions of the Germany/Dubai bilateral that aligns with what you believe:
1. Fares must be at or above German airline fares for routes in competition. (EK may not price a connection for less than LH.)
2. 50% O&D requirement. Its circumvented by short holidays, but that is forcing EK to be creative.

But how many connections have those rules hindered for Germany?

But there never was an intention to have the alliances. But they are here. As long as there are more than three alliances, I have no issue with them. More than three means EK and the Virgin airlines still compete mostly outside the alliances.

If you have a problem, have countries negotiate new bilaterals. India gained tremendous access to the mid-east markets in other industries by granting the air travel rights. Should India forfeit their gains in the chemical industries and pharma industries to turn back the clock on airlines? Or should India get into the connecting market?

Lightsaber

nomorerjs · Fri Jul 06, 2012 12:42 am

If *, ORD-DOH is a given (one would think). Yet another reason for EK to avoid ORD (I don't think it will ever happen now).

If 1World, ORD-DOH is a given (EY may not be happy, but keeps it away from UA). DFW-DOH would be real interesting as well (given EK is in the market).

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net