QF/EK deal would be complicated by BA/AA bid
The possibility of an IAG bid for a minority stake in bankrupt American Airlines has been confirmed in European and US reports by its CEO, and former British Airways CEO, Willie Walsh.
IAG is the parent company of British Airways and Spanish flag carrier Iberia.
While the reports are a level higher than your typical stock market hypothetical, in that Walsh has anointed it through his commentary as an officially sanctioned and no doubt deliberately endorsed hypothetical, such a bid has yet to emerge.
But it would add some interesting static into the discussions between Emirates and Qantas about the ‘simple code share’ that the UAE carrier has given a six month period in which to become reality.
What the parent company of British Airways does in relation to American Airlines affects Qantas on three fronts, in that each of these carriers have a common and mutually relevant membership of the Oneworld alliance, and Qantas has an individual joint services agreement or joint business venture with BA and AA respectively.
It is considered by every analyst yet to make headlines on the topic that an Emirates-Qantas codeshare would be either be harmful but not fatal to the British Airways interest in its agreement with Qantas, or so toxic that Qantas would have to trade whatever benefits it gets from that arrangement for the necessarily superior benefits of a deal with Emirates.
However it is also argued that a continuation of the American Airlines arrangements are essential for Qantas to fend off the potential strengths of the Virgin Australia commercial relationship with Delta, the largest American airline, across and beyond the Pacific.
The potential for tension in the American Airlines situation is obvious, and not just limited to what IAG might or might not do. The front runner for a merger with or takeover of American Airlines is US Airways, which doesn’t belong to, nor aspire to being in, the Oneworld alliance, and if it calls the shots in the future, it might also impact on the benefits Qantas currently gets from its association with American Airlines.
This is not about taking a position for or against a deal between Qantas and Emirates, but a recognition of the appearance on the horizon of some new and potentially complicating factors.










Please login below to comment, OR simply register here :
Thank you for registering, we have just sent you a confirmation email, which includes your new password to be entered below.
According to the FT, US Airways has stated that if it buys AA, the merged entity will remain in Oneworld. Walsh had previously come out in favour of the US Airways/AA merger.
True. But only if we ignore the rather careful language in some of the US based analysis.
The real question, on which I have no position at this stage, is whether or not Emirates can bring more to Qantas than it might lose in other commercial relationships. I think there are very positive cases that can be made for and against an Emirates deal, if it turns out to be a simple but comprehensive code share.
It is better for Qantas as this stage to have to choose between positive opportunities, rather than negative opportunities.
Or so I hope, at 1453 eastern time today. Things could change in a flash.
Hi Ben
Whilst BA may not like QF having a tie-up with EK; I doubt whether it will have any impact on the following”
- whether or not QF stays within oneworld (highly unlikely it would be kicked out regardless of what BA (or AA) feel about QF
- QF’s very close bilateral alliance with AA (predates oneworld and QF and EK tie-up will have little impact on AA, and hence on the QF/AA relationship
IF BA were pragmatic about QF-EK tie-up (rather than emotional) they would maintain Joint Services Agreement with QF on Australia- UK services via SIN. Terminating it would have moredetrimental impact on BA than QF.
On the subject of AA, AA will endeavour not to merge with anyone. It does not want to merge with US Air. Although AA in Chapter 11, it will emerge much leaner and tougher and US Air actually needs AA far more than reverse.
Very big restrictions on foreign ownership in a US carrier and really cannot see the benefit of BA (IAG) investing AA unless it was white knight strategy on behalf of AA to hinder take-over of AA by other parties.
The big PE groups may yet have a shot at AA if they believe that AA can climb out the other side with a vengeance; but here the uncertainlty is the volatility of fuel prices which are now running close to 40% of airline’s cost. They would probably get a much better return on money eleswhere and the financial institutions currently very wary about funding large acquistions; let alone funding airline takeovers where even in better times only about 3 airlines in the world have continuously returned their cost of capital.
If they do a code share for continental Europe and a possibly a QF (A332) flight to Frankfurt via Dubai and leave Singapore for UK hub there may be fewer issues but 25% of the UK load goes to Europe so most (but not all of that) will be lost to Dubai. Is this enought to have it kicked out of OW or the BA Agreement; probably not.
Doesn’t it seem sad that we don’t have a Star Alliance carrier down here? I fly SQ/TG (and often LH) to Europe and the standard is generally VERY high (probably moreso on SG and TG than on LH). Within Europe, LH, SA and BM offer efficient and usually comfortable flights. Europe-US-Europe – UA has lifted its game significantly in the last couple of years and I am happy to fly UA. Just a pity I can’t fly Star Alliance within Australia. IF I could, I could make QF COMPLETELY irrelevant to me!
Please login below to comment, OR simply register here :
Thank you for registering, we have just sent you a confirmation email, which includes your new password to be entered below.