MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 22951 posts, RR: 66 Posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1721 times:
American Airlines and Swiss will be ending their codeshares on trans-Atlantic flights form Zurich to Los Angeles and O'Hare effective 30 October 2005. Not coincidently, O'Hare and LAX are Star Alliance hubs.
However, Swiss and American will continue to codeshare on routes from Zurcih to Boston, Dallas, Miami, and New York City, as well as intra-Europe, Africa, Tel Aviv, and Mumbai.
This is how it will be at least through the winter timetable. I've been hearing that LX/AA would like to keep a partnership going despite Star, though it will clearly be a reduced partnership. Keyword here is like to, because it may not be possible. There are issues with this, such as some immunity issues, that might make it difficult.
Until then, AA will continue to partner with LX on flights to the East Coast.
HB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 3696 posts, RR: 64 Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1644 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
This was bound to happed following the recent Lufthansa take over, and I fear this will only be the beginning. Apart from possible regulatory challenges, I can't possibly imagine that Lufthansa would be pleased with a continuing partnership between LX and AA. So, I believe that we will see the cooperation further stripped down in the future, likely with the abolishment of the remaining transatlantic joint operations and the beyond-hub codesharing.
For Swiss, such a move might mean the end of the MIA flight, as this flight relies at least partly on connecting traffic to and from the Carribean and Central America. I cannot believe that LH would sustain a year round MIA flight at MUC whereas this seems not possible at MUC. The end of the MIA flight would be detrimental for both AA and LX, as this flight is a moneyspinner. I do however not believe that AA would contemplate starting its own MIA-ZRH ops without beyond ZRH codeshare ops.
As for AA, the end of the LX-relationship might lead to a reinforced cooperation with SN and reliance on its extensive European network. AA might very well strengthen its position at BRU with the addition of a MIA/BOS/DFW link. It is also rumored that AA's future India plans call for a BOM operation with an intermediate BRU stop.
DeltaMIA From United States, joined Feb 2004, 1656 posts, RR: 15 Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1618 times:
Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 1): As for AA, the end of the LX-relationship might lead to a reinforced cooperation with SN and reliance on its extensive European network. AA might very well strengthen its position at BRU with the addition of a MIA/BOS/DFW link.
While I love SN and BRU I don't think AA would resort to them for anything beyond their current operation. SN sole feed from North America comes from the couple of AA BRU flights. Unless SN were to expand themselves into North America you can't say anything AA does would strengthen their position in Europe. Aside from that SN has limited service when compared to other European gateways of CDG, FRA, MUC, FCO, MXP, AMS. AA is better having BA or IB pick up the slack.
Quoting MAH4546 (Thread starter): Keyword here is like to, because it may not be possible.
DL would have loved to keep SR...LX for their Atlantic partnership even with their new AF codeshare, but AF would have none of it and it was hard to compete against AF's limitless destinations. Basically it became one or the other and unfortunately for SR they had to go. I
It's a big building with patients, but that's not important right now.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 22951 posts, RR: 66 Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1603 times:
Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 1): For Swiss, such a move might mean the end of the MIA flight, as this flight relies at least partly on connecting traffic to and from the Carribean and Central America. I cannot believe that LH would sustain a year round MIA flight at MUC whereas this seems not possible at MUC.
Lufthansa has decided not to operate MIA-MUC this winter, letting LTU have the route to themselves, because they rather have Swiss handle MIA-ZRH. MIA-ZRH is a stronger yielding market. For now, this is how it will be handled, with the ZRH flight essentially replacing LH's MUC flight. Swiss pulling out of MIA is definitley a possibility, but Lufthansa/Swiss have chosen to make Miami a FRA/ZRH station, rather than FRA/MUC, at least this winter. The high-yields in Miami<->Europe flights come from flights to southern Europe - especially France and Italy - and Zurich is a better hub for these high-yielding passengers. Miami traffic to northern Europe is traditionally lower yielding holiday traffic.
There has also been talk about Swiss leaving LAX, JNB, and/or BOS.
Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 1): I do however not believe that AA would contemplate starting its own MIA-ZRH ops without beyond ZRH codeshare ops.
AA actually is studying MIA-ZRH if Swiss pulls out, it is very possible. It would replace DFW-ZRH.
HB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 3696 posts, RR: 64 Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1593 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting DeltaMIA (Reply 2): SN sole feed from North America comes from the couple of AA BRU flights. Unless SN were to expand themselves into North America you can't say anything AA does would strengthen their position in Europe. Aside from that SN has limited service when compared to other European gateways of CDG, FRA, MUC, FCO, MXP, AMS. AA is better having BA or IB pick up the slack.
SN European network is much more extensive than many would believe and connecting through BRU is a stroll through the park compared to connecting at Heathrow. As for IB and its MAD hub, it's hard to see how MAD would cater to connecting passengers to Berlin, Gotenborg or even Budapest. I'd say that SN is by far the best option for AA should the LX cooperation come to an end.
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 3): There has also been talk about Swiss leaving LAX, JNB, and/or BOS.
I'm aware of those lines of thought, and my money is on LAX. I somehow can't see LX leaving JNB, for sure not now that OS is contemplating a return. LAX has been a problem station for LX and before that for SR, with high loads but very questionable yields. SFO, served by SR between 1997 and 2001, was even worse but with a large Star Hub, that might change. Nevertheless, I believe it's likely LX will withdraw from the California market and relaunch some Asia flights, likely to India (DEL) and China (PEK and/or PVG).
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 3): MIA-ZRH is a stronger yielding market. For now, this is how it will be handled, with the ZRH flight essentially replacing LH's MUC flight. Swiss pulling out of MIA is definitley a possibility, but Lufthansa/Swiss have chosen to make Miami a FRA/ZRH station, rather than FRA/MUC, at least this winter. The high-yields in Miami<->Europe flights come from flights to southern Europe - especially France and Italy - and Zurich is a better hub for these high-yielding passengers. Miami traffic to northern Europe is traditionally lower yielding holiday traffic.
It'll be interesting to see how LH is going to deal with the MUC and ZRH hubs, which are to a large extent each other's rivals. Spreading out secondary longhaul destinations over the 2 hubs, will necessitate sufficient European feed at both hubs, and therefore a lot of duplicate service. I would venture to predict that within the next 5 years, LH will choose for either MUC or ZRH as a longhaul hub, with the loser being left with very limited loghaul ops.
Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 3): AA actually is studying MIA-ZRH if Swiss pulls out, it is very possible. It would replace DFW-ZRH.
I've always thought they would bring back the ORD-ZRH connection as a replacement of DFW-ZRH if and when the LX-cooperation ceases to exist. As for MIA, which one is more likely, a MIA-BRU or a MIA-ZRH?
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 22951 posts, RR: 66 Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1557 times:
Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 4):
I've always thought they would bring back the ORD-ZRH connection as a replacement of DFW-ZRH if and when the LX-cooperation ceases to exist. As for MIA, which one is more likely, a MIA-BRU or a MIA-ZRH?
AA much rather open up the Latin America/Caribbean connections at MIA rather than the domestic connections in O'Hare. And Swiss isn't likely to be leaving Chicago anytime soon, so they wouldn't have the market to themselves.
As for what's more likely...MIA-BRU definitley, as long as Swiss is flying to MIA, and I personally don't think Swiss will be pulling out, with or without AA.
DeltaMIA From United States, joined Feb 2004, 1656 posts, RR: 15 Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1565 times:
Quoting HB-IWC (Reply 4): SN European network is much more extensive than many would believe and connecting through BRU is a stroll through the park compared to connecting at Heathrow.
I wasn't saying it isn't. I just don't see room for growth with the SN BRU hub for AA beyond what they have presently. I personally love BRU and I myself used SN to get to THF and CDG.
It's a big building with patients, but that's not important right now.
HT From Germany, joined May 2005, 4434 posts, RR: 20 Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1545 times:
At peak-times MUC already now has insufficient runway capacity (that´s why they are planning to add a third parallel runway).
ZRH (or say: "Switzerland") is quite big when it comes to business-travel. So, pulling out flights to destinations like BOS probably would scare-away those high-yield travellers and invite-in other carriers to open up that route. That´s what happened with BSL - NYC when LX pulled out. A big pharmaceutical company in BSL is said to now run its own service to EWR, as they did no longer want to take the train to ZRH ...
Hopefully, somebody at LX (and LH) has learned from that
Once the third runway @ MUC is operational, I do see a future for MUC and ZRH, where ZRH has intercontinental service at least to high-yield/high-capacity destinations plus *A-hubs and MUC (apart from the same market as for ZRH) caters also for the secondary routes (instead of or in addition to FRA).
-HT
Carpe diem ! Life is too short to waste your time ...
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 22951 posts, RR: 66 Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1486 times:
Quoting BOSPMV (Reply 8):
I doubt, very higly, that Swiss will leave BOS, or LAX, as for MIA, thats another story.
MIA is a better performing station for Swiss, financially, than either BOS or LAX. Swiss has publicly said to the media that the Boston flights, along with LA, Jo'Burg, Bangkok, Cairo, and Miami, are being re-evaluated. Adding to that, their LAX flights bleed money like crazy. It still amazes me they continue to fly the route. The question marker with Miami is whether or not the flight will continue to be profitable without an AA codeshare. Check your facts before saying "thats another story".
Quoting BOSPMV (Reply 8):
has LH ever operated a MIA-MUC route?
Yes, last winter and the winter before that. LTU also operates an MIA-MUC route year-round
There is a chance Lufthansa will be bringing MIA-MUC back this winter again, they haven't finalized the winter timetable, but for now they have called it a no-go, and it's for the better. With Swiss under their umbrella, they are better off leaving the market to Swiss. As I said, Miami-Southern Europe is where the money is, and Swiss better capitalizes on this. Alitalia's AZ 636/637 flight, for example, is the single best performing flight in their US network.
Panamair From United States, joined Oct 2001, 3040 posts, RR: 16 Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1421 times:
Quoting MAH4546 (Thread starter): However, Swiss and American will continue to codeshare on routes from Zurcih to Boston, Dallas, Miami, and New York City, as well as intra-Europe, Africa, Tel Aviv, and Mumbai.
This is how it will be at least through the winter timetable. I've been hearing that LX/AA would like to keep a partnership going despite Star, though it will clearly be a reduced partnership. Keyword here is like to, because it may not be possible. There are issues with this, such as some immunity issues, that might make it difficult.
Until then, AA will continue to partner with LX on flights to the East Coast.
On the FF program and miles accumulation side however, by March 2006, AAdvantage members will no longer be able to earn miles on LX transatlantic flights except for JFK-ZRH and by end of October 2006, even JFK-ZRH miles earning will be gone. This is already an indication that the whole AA-LX partnership could be 'toast' by the end of the 2006 summer schedule.
HB-IWC From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 3696 posts, RR: 64 Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1413 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting BOSPMV (Reply 8): I doubt, very higly, that Swiss will leave BOS, or LAX, as for MIA, thats another story.
LAX has been losing money for as long as I can remember, and it's a wonder Swiss is still going there after several rounds of restructuring which saw the loss of many a longhaul destination. I presume, the LH/LX are planning to give LAX a very last chance, banking on the Star feed.
In the days of Swissair, BOS used to be a good destination for the airline and saw the B743 and later even double daily flights. I know those results have deteriorated, but I can't say whether the line is in the red.
As for MIA, and contrary to what you suggest, this route is profitable for the airline, and has been ever since Swissair started the route on September 16, 1998. However, the cooperation with AA is a vital contributing factor to the profitability of MIA, and with this cooperation in a dead end, the future of MIA is likely in jeopardy.
I guess that the decision to abandon MIA or any other station will, given the airline's limited available resources, also depend on future network development at LX after its entry in Star. In particular, LX might prefer to operate an extra interhub transatlantic flight to complement its daily ORD operation and UA's IAD flight. Such a move might entail Swiss' return to IAD, and the airline might even be looking into DEN and SFO (although its last experience there was rather dramatic). If IAD comes online once again, expect MIA to go.
Last but not least, there is the developments in Asia. I'm sure LH is keen on utilizing Swiss' dormant rights to India and China, but in order to do so, the airline might need to give up some other destination in order to free up airframes. Nothing has been heard lately about Lufthansa's pledge of additional widebody capacity to be stationed at ZRH.
Sponsor Message: 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 22951 posts, 
From Greece, joined Sep 2000, 3696 posts, 
From United States, joined Feb 2004, 1656 posts, 
From Germany, joined May 2005, 4434 posts, 
