JetBlue and British Airways are planning to launch a partnership. The question is, does this suggest that the situation between American and British Airways is souring a bit, or does this point to JetBlue maybe eventually joining oneworld?
In this post:
JetBlue & British Airways want to codeshare on flights
JetBlue and British Airways have filed with the Department of Transportation (DOT), requesting permission to launch a reciprocal codeshare agreement. The airlines intend to have a codeshare agreement on 92 routes initially, though once approved, they can expand the codeshare at will:
- JetBlue would codeshare on 17 British Airways routes from London Heathrow (LHR) to destinations in Europe; this means that passengers traveling on JetBlue across the Atlantic could then connect on British Airways to destinations like Berlin (BER), Geneva (GVA), Warsaw (WAW), and more
- British Airways would codeshare on 75 JetBlue routes from New York (JFK) and Boston (BOS) to destinations across the United States; this means that passengers traveling on British Airways across the Atlantic could then connect on JetBlue to destinations like Austin (AUS), Phoenix (PHX), San Diego (SAN), and more
There’s no reason that JetBlue and British Airways wouldn’t be granted permission to have a codeshare agreement, since this is a common level of cooperation between many airlines. As of now, there’s no mention in the filing of any sort of frequent flyer or loyalty reciprocity, but maybe that will come at a later date.
What would this partnership mean for industry dynamics?
Keep in mind that British Airways is part of a transatlantic joint venture with American, along with Finnair, Iberia, and Aer Lingus. This is one of the most powerful joint ventures in the world, and with this, the airlines can coordinate their schedules, fares, and more, and even share revenue.
So given the close cooperation between British Airways and American, one wonders how JetBlue fits into this. Does British Airways have American’s blessing for this, and it’s part of an overall play for all the airlines to eventually cooperate more closely? Is British Airways going behind American’s back here, realizing that American can’t provide the feed that British Airways needs in the Northeast?
There are couple of significant dynamics at play here:
- JetBlue has a close partnership with Aer Lingus (also part of the transatlantic joint venture, plus part of the same airline group as British Airways) and Qatar Airways (which owns a stake in British Airways’ parent company)
- American and JetBlue had the Northeast Alliance, whereby the two airlines had really close cooperation, but it ended up being blocked by the Department of Justice (DOJ)
The way I see it, this could go one of a couple of ways and I honestly think both scenarios are roughly equally likely.
On one end of the spectrum, maybe British Airways is frustrated by American’s lack of connectivity in many markets, in particular in the Northeast. Places like New York and Boston are among British Airways’ most important airports, yet American isn’t able to provide as much connectivity there as British Airways needs, and wants JetBlue to help with that. If that’s the case, this may have very well been done without consulting American.
But on the other end of the spectrum, one can’t help but wonder if American might be in on this, and if JetBlue might even eventually be heading in the direction of joining oneworld:
- We know that JetBlue is struggling financially, as the airline is having a hard time figuring out its place in the market
- American and JetBlue had a close partnership that was blocked by the DOJ; while they can’t cooperate as closely as they did (where they were exchanging slots and coordinating routes), the judge did say they could have a more standard partnership in the future, like what American has with Alaska (which is great for consumers)
- The American and JetBlue partnership being blocked is still being litigated at the moment, which is why American can’t try to restart any sort of a partnership with JetBlue
- American really still needs JetBlue in the Northeast, in order to pursue its strategy of offering long haul service from there, given American’s limited domestic network from JFK
- Long term, I can’t help but wonder if American may want to acquire JetBlue; obviously a different administration would need to be in the White House for that to be approved, though
So yeah, I’m not sure what to think here. Is British Airways just tired of American’s lack of connectivity in some areas, and is going behind its partner’s back? Or are they both in on it, and it’s part of a bigger strategy to once again use JetBlue’s Northeast presence to boost the transatlantic joint venture?
Bottom line
JetBlue and British Airways intend to launch a codeshare agreement. With this, JetBlue will place its code on some European British Airways flights from London, while British Airways will place its code on some US JetBlue flights from Boston and New York.
What makes this development so interesting is the close partnership that British Airways has with American. I’m very curious to see how this plays out…
What do you make of this JetBlue and British Airways codeshare plan?
DOJ hates JetBlue.
This will also fail.
My bet is that BA & AA are in talks about this. I see it as a run-around the DOJ ruling. I truly hope it works out.
While I believe in some of the leading theories, I don't necessarily agree on the evidence/cause.
The LHR/UK market is not it used to be 8 years ago. From a macro perspective, UK's economy has been declining, exacerbated by Brexit. Even as some claim the pandemic drag is over, big corporates are not fully back. On that, LHR is among the hardest hit. The LFs were not pretty for the past months/years for airlines....
While I believe in some of the leading theories, I don't necessarily agree on the evidence/cause.
The LHR/UK market is not it used to be 8 years ago. From a macro perspective, UK's economy has been declining, exacerbated by Brexit. Even as some claim the pandemic drag is over, big corporates are not fully back. On that, LHR is among the hardest hit. The LFs were not pretty for the past months/years for airlines. UA had to trim schedules, with an understanding of the slot policy "Use it or lose it."
Even airlines were reporting "double-digit" growth, execs all admitted that large corporate travel is not back yet.
I personally think this is the big picture. BA need more feed at their largest outstation JFK. Hence, the B76 partnership. AA's Corp mismanagement could be a factor, but likely not as significant as the change of market condition and BA's exposure (100%).
Except B6 A321 once or twice daily barely provides any meaningful feed?
Remember that American was going to originally sponsor B6 to join OW when the partnership was announced. That being said, I heard Rasu Raja was LIVID with BA when they status matched and offered AA elites their lounges and CC's. American definitely needs to watch it's back though, it's changing WAY too much, WAY too fast. The corporate bookings departure is awful enough, and the travel agents thing is a hammer to that nail. They didn't see LATAM leaving either......
Realistically, is there room for a 3rd American carrier in OW? Dont get me wrong it makes sense especially with how well the AA partnership went. Then again AA probably has the pull in OW to make it happen.
Well AA embraced AS’s recruitment given its complementary network. The same scenario re B6’s network, without the regulatory issues (at least according to comments and reports, but I am not versed in that detail). And the other OW airlines would probably be delighted to expand partnerships and therefore access into the US, so I can’t see a reason for them to object? Probably also causing heartburn amongst the other alliances.
I would suggest this is done with the corporation of AA.
In effect it lays the groundwork for a back door for AA to circumnavigate the now blocked partnership with B6 in the event their appeal fails.
I would expect to see BA and B6 introducing reciprocal loyalty benefits such as earning etc on codeshare routes at some point.
I also think them joining OW is unlikely to be smooth. With Alaska and AA...
I would suggest this is done with the corporation of AA.
In effect it lays the groundwork for a back door for AA to circumnavigate the now blocked partnership with B6 in the event their appeal fails.
I would expect to see BA and B6 introducing reciprocal loyalty benefits such as earning etc on codeshare routes at some point.
I also think them joining OW is unlikely to be smooth. With Alaska and AA already part of the alliance, OW is the only alliance to have more than 1 US carrier. To add a third will likely trigger a anti-trust case.
I think all of the speculation could be correct. There's no doubt that AA and B6 will pursue some type of relationship once the appeals are complete. At the very least, expect a codeshare and OW membership.
BA also can't be pleased with AA and its corporate account strategy. My wife works for a large travel tour company and they have pulled all future flying on AA, IB, and BA effective immediately. They sold...
I think all of the speculation could be correct. There's no doubt that AA and B6 will pursue some type of relationship once the appeals are complete. At the very least, expect a codeshare and OW membership.
BA also can't be pleased with AA and its corporate account strategy. My wife works for a large travel tour company and they have pulled all future flying on AA, IB, and BA effective immediately. They sold a lot of seats especially in premium classes to those airlines.
Additionally, AA could take back all of their LGA/JFK B6 slots and create a pretty sizeable connecting operation if they wanted to.
I expect major decisions to be announced following the election.
This is all about the corporate travel market, AA has dramatically scaled back on its approach where as BA is heavily invested in it to fill the transatlantic a380’s that feed the rest of their network.
Until AA invests more in corporate travel BA will continue to diversify its partners in attempt to maximize traffic.
This is indeed major because BA is allowing B6 to codeshare beyond LHR. B6 still has only a few LHR flights on narrowbody aircraft but offering a non-alliance partner something otherwise duplicating what a JV partner gets is significant.
Let’s be done with the notion that AA or B6 will file for bankruptcy or sell slots to each other.
One thing to consider is the numbers of seats between NYC and LHR.
AA currently funnels traffic through PHL, CLT and ORD to take traffic that could go via JFK or BOS.
The number of seats available through PHL, CLT and ORD are much fewer given fewer frequencies and smaller gauge.
AA uses 77Ws at JFK to have F class (and didn't have a 787 base). AA even has a 772 at BOS...
One thing to consider is the numbers of seats between NYC and LHR.
AA currently funnels traffic through PHL, CLT and ORD to take traffic that could go via JFK or BOS.
The number of seats available through PHL, CLT and ORD are much fewer given fewer frequencies and smaller gauge.
AA uses 77Ws at JFK to have F class (and didn't have a 787 base). AA even has a 772 at BOS and BA has A380s.
In NYC in particular, the corporate advantage is frequencies, which UA is trying to match at EWR. UA is using high-J 767s which much fewer Y seats.
AA/BA need more feed into JFK and to some extent BOS to fill up the large number of seats on those planes.
You can buy a economy roundtrip in the summer from JFK or BOS to LHR for $800 roundtrip with taxes. The fare is much more from smaller cities, where the codeshare pro-ration of fares makes it attractive to both BA (comparing O&D JFK-LHR fares) and for B6 (comparing the share they get form XYZ-JFK). this was not the case for AS/DL out of SEA when they were partnering together given the low yields to Asia at the time.
I'm not sure what to make of your various statements and the lines of thought?
First, BA needs feed at JFK/BOS? Sure, reasonable, who doesn't want profitable connectivity. But I wonder if the greater value is connectivity beyond LHR. Though LHR is a unique finance and other industry bastion (just like NYC), it still reflects the same value as the other Star and SkyTeam European hubs for the UA/DL, e.g., beyond connectivity.
Its your other...
I'm not sure what to make of your various statements and the lines of thought?
First, BA needs feed at JFK/BOS? Sure, reasonable, who doesn't want profitable connectivity. But I wonder if the greater value is connectivity beyond LHR. Though LHR is a unique finance and other industry bastion (just like NYC), it still reflects the same value as the other Star and SkyTeam European hubs for the UA/DL, e.g., beyond connectivity.
Its your other points that confuse me. Corp need for frequency, yes, followed by reference to economy fares? Poor yield in Y NYC-LON summer takes care of itself, but low season can be a yield challenge on pt-to-pt and Europe, but that's also the season to maximize connectivity to other markets which are in High Season, such as Africa, etc. Better Y yields from behind points in the US (yes, can also be very true), which is what ORD, PHL, CLT DFW captures...so what exactly is your thought and analysis re the use of the various hubs markets and connectivity?
Thanks!
The problem with that, is that it's only looking at the immediate benefit to NYC ops.... what happens to the net overall for AA's network, if they do that?
It...
The problem with that, is that it's only looking at the immediate benefit to NYC ops.... what happens to the net overall for AA's network, if they do that?
It costs way less to route a cnnx pax through CLT than through JFK or BOS, so if I'm AA, why would I reroute that traffic, instead of taking the L on the seats out of the more expensive northeast?
C. - It is neither an indication of BA being unhappy with AA or an indication that JetBlue is looking at OneWorld.
It's two airlines entering into a codeshare. Airlines do this all the time outside of JVs and alliances. Nothing new.
This is the most likely answer.
Quite major i think. This ought to be a big win for Jetblue due to the connections it can offer to mainland Europe. They could have also partnered with AF/KL and offered even more connections from AMS/CDG but they seem more focused on London & OneWorld.
Remains to be seen if Jetblue will raise prices to Europe and then won't be the disruptor they want/aim to be.
People need to remember the HA & JL precedent. The feds prevented Hawaiian from fully coordinating with JAL bc there were already too many other us airlines in partnership. I do not see the feds approving JetBlue joining oneworld in the anytime soon.
@ Portlanjuanero -- Hawaiian and Japan Airlines were trying to launch a joint venture, which can be hard to get approved, since it's the same as eliminating a competitor. The same regulatory approval isn't required for joining an alliance. To my knowledge, the DOJ has never blocked any airline from joining one of the "big three" alliances (for that matter, it's not even something airlines request permission for).
How amazing would it be if JetBlue joined OneWorld...oh man, that would SERIOUSLY boost OneWorld, as it would be much easier to redeem positioning flights.
Frankly, I think it'd be a win-win, as JetBlue doesn't much overlap with BA / IB's turf.
Fingers crossed...
JetBlue, down the road, will be acquired, in parts, or whole, by one or more of the US4. It's only a matter of time. JetBlue is unprofitable, has high costs, doesn't run a clean operation, and continues to waste resources on vanity projects like LAX (which they are dismantling), and TATL flying, which is totally unprofitable for them outside of the summer season.
With the issues around acquisition I feel like it may happen through bankruptcy at this point. Unfortunately, I could honestly see JetBlue being scrapped for parts
Even under a different administration, I find it hard to see an American acquisition of JetBlue being approved. In that situation, all American would do is “rationalize” service from BOS and JFK, resulting in higher fares and less options on the whole. If not the DOJ, states would sue to block the merger. I don’t see any of the Big 4 doing any kind of acquisitions unless something radically changes.
Also, remember that American...
Even under a different administration, I find it hard to see an American acquisition of JetBlue being approved. In that situation, all American would do is “rationalize” service from BOS and JFK, resulting in higher fares and less options on the whole. If not the DOJ, states would sue to block the merger. I don’t see any of the Big 4 doing any kind of acquisitions unless something radically changes.
Also, remember that American *could* provide more feed to the transatlantic JV out of NYC and BOS if they wanted to - they just choose not to.
That's not correct. AA doesn't provide more feed out of NYC, specifically at JFK, because it doesn't have the slots to do so.
I completely fail to understand why this would indicate problems between AA and BA / this is a very click bait article once again to me.
BA is in the process of co-locating with AA at basically all of its main US outstations (already happened at JFK, happening soon at ORD, etc).
It’s pretty clear AA also probably wants to get closer to JetBlue and is being blocked from doing so currently, no? Ideally I imagine AA and BA would want JetBlue in the TATL JV.
@ Tom -- You're welcome to disagree with, but I don't think it's fair to call this clickbait, as I (and many others) have that take. If you simply disagree with my take (which is fair), then I think there's a better word to use than "clickbait."
I'd actually disagree regarding the joint venture -- I don't think American and British Airways want JetBlue in the transatlantic joint venture, as much as they want more...
@ Tom -- You're welcome to disagree with, but I don't think it's fair to call this clickbait, as I (and many others) have that take. If you simply disagree with my take (which is fair), then I think there's a better word to use than "clickbait."
I'd actually disagree regarding the joint venture -- I don't think American and British Airways want JetBlue in the transatlantic joint venture, as much as they want more connectivity domestically. JetBlue doesn't exactly have the highest yielding traffic across the Atlantic and doesn't have many corporate contracts. Adding JetBlue to the transatlantic joint venture would probably lower combined yields for the airlines.
My point is simply that if British Airways pursued JetBlue in partnership with American, then I think it's indicative of a bigger strategy with the airlines. If British Airways pursued JetBlue without consulting American, I'm guessing there's probably some bad blood with executives at American.
It's only speculations, so yes it's clickbait as you know probably nothing on what is happening. AA has no power on BA's strategy, outside of the JV, which is not a merger. AA can't block it or whatever.
@ AAB6 -- I'm sharing news (which is not speculation), and then I'm sharing my opinion and analysis on what this could mean (which is speculation, since obviously no one in a position to talk knows what's going on).
Regardless, none of that fits the definition of clickbait. Clickbait and speculation aren't the same thing.
Clickbait? You took the time to read the entire article and post a fairly extensive comment. That's not clickbait.
BA is reportedly unhappy with AA's decision to rewrite its corporate sales strategy. BA depends heavily on corporate contracts to fill premium cabins. AA increasingly less so and wants to drive sales to AA.com as much as possible. This is causing some strains. BA doesn't need a ton of feed at JFK. That's not the issue.
Any sources of that ? Do you think BA and B6 just started thinking about this partnership recently ?
I’m doubtful of this claim re BA/AA split re corporate accounts. AA needs the corp accounts as well, and has already assigned authorized CTMs and select other agencies to book travel.
AA.com is the intended solution for SME and non corp and other non J or W bookings and leisure. Even then high volume leisure will also likely have waivers (hello Expedia Group, hello cruise accounts, e.g. Miami, etc, that rely on proprietary highly algorithmic...
I’m doubtful of this claim re BA/AA split re corporate accounts. AA needs the corp accounts as well, and has already assigned authorized CTMs and select other agencies to book travel.
AA.com is the intended solution for SME and non corp and other non J or W bookings and leisure. Even then high volume leisure will also likely have waivers (hello Expedia Group, hello cruise accounts, e.g. Miami, etc, that rely on proprietary highly algorithmic booking engines).
Do you really think Citibank, et al, want their staff spending their precious hours making their own bookings on AA.com? Not to mention the time to manage their bookings.
And if you think there’s a split between BA/AA re corp accounts…what solution does B6 provide for those accounts, as they have zero visibility in the broad corp market, and likely a miniscule corp sales team, if that.
So I call nonsense re this argument.