JetBlue & British Airways Plan Partnership: Major Or No Big Deal?

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 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.

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.

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...

Clickbait? You took the time to read the entire article and post a fairly extensive comment. That's not clickbait.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Any sources of that ? Do you think BA and B6 just started thinking about this partnership recently ?

@ 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).

@ 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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 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?

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.

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.

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......

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%).

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.

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.

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.

DOJ hates JetBlue.

This will also fail.

Except B6 A321 once or twice daily barely provides any meaningful feed?