Alaska Airlines recently acquired Hawaiian Airlines, and Alaska Air Group is wasting no time with making changes. The company has just revealed all kinds of details about its future, ranging from launching long haul flights from Seattle (Tokyo is the first destination), to introducing a new premium credit card, to opening more lounges.
We’ve known that Alaska Air Group plans to maintain both the Alaska and Hawaiian brands in the long run. That’s kind of unprecedented, because with virtually every airline merger we’ve seen of domestic carriers, one brand survives. Well, we now have a sense of how the company plans to maintain two distinct brands… sort of.
In this post:
How Alaska Air Group will maintain Alaska & Hawaiian brands
From the time that Alaska’s takeover of Hawaiian was announced, executives at the company insisted that both airline groups would stick around in the long run. I imagine this came down to two factors.
First, I suspect this was intended to increase the odds of the takeover getting regulatory approval, by showing Alaska’s commitment to the state of Hawaii, and how the deal would benefit consumers. Second, both of these airlines have location-specific names, so it would be kind of strange to fly on an airline named Alaska between Hawaii and Japan, for example (I mean, I suppose Alaska operates all kinds of flights not to and from the state of Alaska, so maybe not actually).
Within the next year, both Alaska and Hawaiian should be on a single operating certificate, which will simplify things in terms of scheduling, assigning crews, etc. On the back end and internally, the two airlines will be one. But how do you go about actually maintaining two separate brands as far as customers are concerned? Well, now we know.
Today, Alaska CEO Ben Minicucci revealed the company’s strategy — in the long run, the plan is for all Alaska Air Group flights, to, from, and within Hawaii, to have the Hawaiian Airlines branding. Flights not to, from, or within Hawaii, will have the Alaska Airlines branding.
This means that aircraft will be rebranded in the long run in order to reflect the markets they serve. Eventually wide body jets flying long haul from Seattle will have Alaska branding, while Hawaiian could very well get some Boeing 737s in its fleet, featuring Hawaiian branding.
The logistics here will be incredibly complex
If you’re going to maintain two separate airline brands, then Alaska Air Group’s strategy is probably the most obvious way to go about it. When flying to or from Hawaii, people like the idea of flying with Hawaiian Airlines. For those from the mainland, it’s like starting your vacation before even getting to your destination.
But this is also really complicated. I’d assume that planes will maintain distinct branding, and that limits the ability for the company to shift aircraft between markets. For example, in the long run, does that mean a particular A330 couldn’t fly from Tokyo to Seattle and then from Seattle to Honolulu, since one flight would be Alaska branded, and one would be Hawaiian branded?
It also limits the ability to shift demand seasonally. For example, maybe the company wants to fly wide body aircraft between the mainland and Hawaii in winter, and then from Seattle to Europe in summer.
Will the two airlines introduce some sort of a joint livery that covers both brands, and then the only “branding” for a particular flight will be the flight number and perhaps the vibe of the onboard service? Keep in mind that eventually work groups will be integrated, so presumably you’ll have legacy Alaska flight attendants flying Hawaiian jets, and vice versa.
I suppose this is as logical as any process could be for trying to maintain two distinct brands… but this still seems less than ideal, especially given the synergies being unlocked with the ideal.
Anyway, it’s going to be quite some time before this is actually relevant for passengers. Because the two airlines are still on separate operating certificates, they will continue to operate as distinct brands for now. In other words, it will be Hawaiian operating the long haul flights out of Seattle, since the A330s are on that operating certificate.
Bottom line
We’ve just learned how Alaska Air Group will maintain two brands going forward. The company will use the Hawaiian Airlines brand for all flights to, from, and within Hawaii, and will use the Alaska Airlines brand for everything else.
Maintaining two separate brands is complicated, especially given how airlines shift around capacity and do their fleet planning. So we now have a better indication of how this will work, though I wonder if there might be a bit more to this, once the final decision has to be signed off on.
What do you make of Alaska Air Group’s branding strategy?
Can air miles from Alaska and Hawaiian be combined?
Alaska has shown that they can successfully run another airline in their air group. Horizon has separate livery, fleet, maintenance, and leadership, yet still serves Alaska customers seamlessly on the front end. I suspect the front end will be unchanged, while Hawaiian still maintains their back end like a wholly owned subsidiary.
I honestly don't care if it says "Skippy's Airline" on the plane, as long as the service and little nuances don't change. Right now, people like myself fly Hawaiian for the experience. No other airline does the little things like Hawai'ian does. It's like starting your Hawai'ian vacation early. Here's a word of advice for Alaska Air Group... if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
How about paint one side Alaska and the other Hawaiian … it’s been done before , I remember flying on a 727 which was painted with Cook Islands International one side and Polynesian airlines the other
Air France-KLM and Lufthansa Group do it so why could a US airline not too? This is not unprecedented.
This is an overall nice improvement for Alaska Air frequently flyers. As million miler and lifetime Gold member, I will be able to plan international without having to book flights on partner airlines.
I have a feeling you might see a third airline name that will hand long internatiobal routes. It could be dual logo or they come up with one name for the big planes.
Image the big planes being under thr Horizon logo along with inter island flights
I can see issues with Alaska employèe seniority for dead heading to their base on the other brand Hawaiian with no Hawaiian seniority and vice versa.
They'll establish a protocol while the seniority lists are separate. Deadheading to position a crew and commuting to base to fly an assignment are two very different things and will be handled differently.
I doubt they'd actually limit it to where a particular aircraft could only operate one set of routes or the other. They'll likely have them branded to prefer one set of routes or the other, but have them able to swap out if needed for operational reasons.
For the domestic fleet, this actually makes a lot of sense from a branding perspective, in my opinion. I've personally always thought it kind of odd to fly...
I doubt they'd actually limit it to where a particular aircraft could only operate one set of routes or the other. They'll likely have them branded to prefer one set of routes or the other, but have them able to swap out if needed for operational reasons.
For the domestic fleet, this actually makes a lot of sense from a branding perspective, in my opinion. I've personally always thought it kind of odd to fly from, say, Nashville, Atlanta, or NYC to Seattle to Hawaii on... Alaska Airlines. Even before the Hawaiian acquisition, Hawaii was already a big part of Alaska's business from all over the continental U.S.... and that just seemed weird. The concept of "Alaska Airlines" ferrying people between, say, San Diego and Honolulu also seems pretty odd from a branding perspective. No brand says "fun and sun in the winter" quite like... "Alaska"??
This seems to indicate that Hawaiian won't be operating wide body flights between HNL and some west coast cities, since Alaska will be coopting their beautiful A330s for long haul international flights. I've stayed loyal to Hawaiian for many years primarily because of wide body flights between Portland and HNL.
IAG - the parent of British Airways (UK), Iberia (Spain) and Aer Lingus (Ireland) is operating three local brands for their various legacy geographic based centers.. All have strong cultural ties and brand loyalty to legacy carrier. This branding strategy has been in place for years.
Combining the operational overhead such as supply chain management,IT, repair and overhaul functions is efficient use of resources over the extended fleet. In addition OEM aircraft and Supplier...
IAG - the parent of British Airways (UK), Iberia (Spain) and Aer Lingus (Ireland) is operating three local brands for their various legacy geographic based centers.. All have strong cultural ties and brand loyalty to legacy carrier. This branding strategy has been in place for years.
Combining the operational overhead such as supply chain management,IT, repair and overhaul functions is efficient use of resources over the extended fleet. In addition OEM aircraft and Supplier negotiation position is stronger as a group. More so than trying to absorb the overhead of separate organizations. Brand identity can be managed separately with a compressive plan.
Hawaiian Airleines benefits greatly from the Alaska robust It infrastructure and knowledge, where Hawaiian crew and Pax apps and other back end functions had fallen behind.
They are stronger together and I expect we will see other localized branding of larger airplane groups over time.
Why not brand it "49/50" (their respective state numbers), and then it doesn't matter how the planes are painted or interiors are colored? One set of crew uniforms, same napkins, etc., etc.
What's more important to me are the generous upgrade policies of Alaska. Will the Hawaiian flights offer those to Frequent Fliers? Certainly re-configuring the cabins on Hawaiian inter-island aircraft with flights of 30 minutes makes no sense. You're lucky to even see...
Why not brand it "49/50" (their respective state numbers), and then it doesn't matter how the planes are painted or interiors are colored? One set of crew uniforms, same napkins, etc., etc.
What's more important to me are the generous upgrade policies of Alaska. Will the Hawaiian flights offer those to Frequent Fliers? Certainly re-configuring the cabins on Hawaiian inter-island aircraft with flights of 30 minutes makes no sense. You're lucky to even see a FA on these flights.
Put a Lei on the tail Eskimo and call it good!!!
What about all the existing Alaska flights you/from Hawaii? Those are changing to Hawaiin?
Alaska in my opinion is truly a class act. Kudos to its leadership, but most importantly the people on their aircraft and ground. They are the BEST in the industry.
Fleet and service class harmonization would be more more important and the most logical way. Alaskan livery or fusion Oneworld-Hawaiian livery with "Alaska Group" subscript will be a second to that.
Kinda reminds me of when the European and Australian flag carriers had to operate a separate brand to fly to Taiwan.
Completely unrelated, to the current topic at hand. Purely a global diplomatic response to Chinese politics. Your time is coming. Just wait until 'the orange one' starts trying to cozy up to Chairman Xi ...
“ Flights not to, from, or within Hawaii, will have the Alaska Airlines branding”. They’ve already announced Hawaiian flights SEA-NRT (with SEA-ICN PLANNED), so this doesn’t seem to be true.
I think Alaska’s whole strategy of buying Hawaiian Airlines was to help with their reputation and forcing people that otherwise would not have to fly in the Boeing, 737 death machines. What will people do if Alaska puts only Boeing 737’s on Hawaiian flights and keeps the solid performers like Hawaiian’s Airbus 330’s on Alaska flights?
I am a frequent flyer to Hawaii and I love Hawaiian airlines. I used to be an Alaska...
I think Alaska’s whole strategy of buying Hawaiian Airlines was to help with their reputation and forcing people that otherwise would not have to fly in the Boeing, 737 death machines. What will people do if Alaska puts only Boeing 737’s on Hawaiian flights and keeps the solid performers like Hawaiian’s Airbus 330’s on Alaska flights?
I am a frequent flyer to Hawaii and I love Hawaiian airlines. I used to be an Alaska Air member Elite member until their Boeing planes started falling out of the air. and pieces of the airplane started falling from the sky. I live in Seattle and last week 12-04-24 on our local news were more employees in the manufacturing plant and supervisors were saying nothing has changed. It is still about how fast the planes are built ignoring safety standards and using old parts that had been thrown in the trash and then retrieved. It is not safe to fly on those planes. Like playing Russian roulette.
Flying death machines? Really? You live here but can't differentiate between 737-800s, 900s, and Maxs? It was only the Maxs that had issues. The 800s and 900s have been reliable workhorses for AS and many other airlines for decades. The issues that caused the 2 infamous Max crashes were software/MCAS related, not manufacturing flaws. To be sure, Boeing can be blamed for trying to sell more planes by insisting that any pilot certified on other...
Flying death machines? Really? You live here but can't differentiate between 737-800s, 900s, and Maxs? It was only the Maxs that had issues. The 800s and 900s have been reliable workhorses for AS and many other airlines for decades. The issues that caused the 2 infamous Max crashes were software/MCAS related, not manufacturing flaws. To be sure, Boeing can be blamed for trying to sell more planes by insisting that any pilot certified on other 737 models could fly the MAX without additional training, but to call all 737 models "flying death machines" is irresponsible, uninformed, and unintelligent.
It is smart for Alaska to keep the Hawaiian Airlines brand. When CVS bought out Longs Drugs (a California based Pharmacy), they kept the name Longs in Hawaii. Walgreens tried to gain foothold but Longs is part of Hawaii's history and culture, there was even a book and play written on it. So Walgreens has not been successful in Hawaii. Hawaii resident's can be loyal to their brands and we support Hawaiian Air since many...
It is smart for Alaska to keep the Hawaiian Airlines brand. When CVS bought out Longs Drugs (a California based Pharmacy), they kept the name Longs in Hawaii. Walgreens tried to gain foothold but Longs is part of Hawaii's history and culture, there was even a book and play written on it. So Walgreens has not been successful in Hawaii. Hawaii resident's can be loyal to their brands and we support Hawaiian Air since many of our relatives and friends work there. I am pretty sure if Alaska changed Hawaiian's name, we would not have brand loyalty and thus give our business to Southwest, Delta, United, American etc.
In due time, the "BEAN COUNTERS" of Alaska will realize it is just to costly to operate an airline separately. When irregular operations happen, you'll see Hawaiian flying Alaska and Alaska flying Hawaiian routes, with mix crews of Hawaiian attire and Alaska's uniforms......just to operate a flight because of irregular operations.
The post is about branding, nothing to do with operations, where they'll no doubt find the efficiencies.
Geez...
I'd imagine they have figured out the concept at a high level on paper including the tradeoffs they'd be willing to make to allow this concept to work and the handling of IRROPS.
However, modeling that in theory is very different than seeing it all work in reality and the associated costs. I don't fly either airline but I do really admire both brands so I hope for their sake and their customers, they actually...
I'd imagine they have figured out the concept at a high level on paper including the tradeoffs they'd be willing to make to allow this concept to work and the handling of IRROPS.
However, modeling that in theory is very different than seeing it all work in reality and the associated costs. I don't fly either airline but I do really admire both brands so I hope for their sake and their customers, they actually properly consider the upside benefit of maintaining a distinct Hawaiian branding (revenue uplift, loyalty, etc.) when the costs of that model start accumulating. It may not be the right strategy in the long-run but I feel companies often underweight or under model the revenue impacts of decisions to dilute a brand...
But BOA cards with no branch in Hawaii instead of Bank of Hawaii (Barclays) ? That's an insult.
And Barclays Bank has no presence in Chicago... but people have used their cards for years.
Air France/KLM, Lufthansa/Swiss/Austrian/Brussels, IAG.
I was thinking about that... Especially after Delta and Northwest merged, many Delta domestic stations had branding that put DL's logo equally along Air France and KLM. I was wondering what they point of giving so much visibility to two European carriers that don't serve MDW at all.
I give it less than 3 years before they create a joint brand. Efficiency is the name of the game in the air travel business and much sooner than later there will come a day where they have to decide to sacrifice efficiency to maintain brand continuity and after that the bean counters will be screaming from the C-Suite to align everything under one name.
It's a terrible marriage. I am a loyal Alaska Gold member and all my benefits for being gold means nothing on Hawaiian. I even have to pay for my seats since all the Alaska flight are no longer available between SJC and HNL from about summer on and I am forced to fly on Hawaiian. Forget about potential upgrades. Worst move ever and not sure I even want to continue being a loyal Alaska flyer.
Hi Cheryl. I'm also MVP gold with Alaska flying out of San Diego. I have noticed that prices are going up, with less competition. I have not yet noticed a lack of seat availability but maybe that's because I fly to Hawaii between October and March and not summer time. Alaska has promised to integrate elite benefits "by the end of the year" and there isn't much time left to do that. I hope that...
Hi Cheryl. I'm also MVP gold with Alaska flying out of San Diego. I have noticed that prices are going up, with less competition. I have not yet noticed a lack of seat availability but maybe that's because I fly to Hawaii between October and March and not summer time. Alaska has promised to integrate elite benefits "by the end of the year" and there isn't much time left to do that. I hope that they keep that promise so that we will have our benefits on Hawaiian flights for seats and upgrades as well.
Any flights from the mainland to Hawai'i and back to the mainland should have the HA branding with all its unique offerings and experiences on flight (meals, drinks, etc). That's part of the appeal and attraction. It's like starting your vacation early. All the flight crew is Hawai'ian, so it makes it fun. Besides, I don't think an Alaska flight crew knows how to make a good Mai Tai, or has really good, useful knowledge...
Any flights from the mainland to Hawai'i and back to the mainland should have the HA branding with all its unique offerings and experiences on flight (meals, drinks, etc). That's part of the appeal and attraction. It's like starting your vacation early. All the flight crew is Hawai'ian, so it makes it fun. Besides, I don't think an Alaska flight crew knows how to make a good Mai Tai, or has really good, useful knowledge of the islands. If they take that away, I might as well just fly Delta since I can leave from my home airport in NC and just go. I'm flying into JFK in NY so I can take HA for the experience. I just recently found family on Maui, so I'll be going to visit at least 2-3 times a year. This is part of the fun of going. That being said, I'm sure AS is going to change things and take away things from those HA flights because that's what big companies do. Streamline and cut costs for their shareholders without taking any of the consumers feelings or requests into consideration, because that's what big corporations do. You see it all the time. AS is going to change things and then put their stamp on it, because that's what a dog does, it marks its territory.
They should just rebrand everything to "49 & 50".
That is actually sorta a cool idea. +1
Having two names gets messy and confusing.
Pick a name like Pacific Air. Currently used by a Vietnamese airline, but buy out the trade name or the airline.
They should just rebrand to Noncontinental Airlines and call it a day.
Or non-contiguous airlines.
Even though both airlines have iconic livery, perhaps a new version that blends the two would be better suited for the brand’s identity.
Per Ben (the CEO) all flights to, from, and within Hawaii will be "Hawaiian Airlines."
I suspect the 12 787s will be in AS livery and the A330s, A321s, 717s, and some 737s will be in HA livery.
He said the A321neo is the best airplane for West Coast-Hawaii flying so it seems they will be dedicated to HI flying for now.
It seems they are committed to the 2 brands w/...
Per Ben (the CEO) all flights to, from, and within Hawaii will be "Hawaiian Airlines."
I suspect the 12 787s will be in AS livery and the A330s, A321s, 717s, and some 737s will be in HA livery.
He said the A321neo is the best airplane for West Coast-Hawaii flying so it seems they will be dedicated to HI flying for now.
It seems they are committed to the 2 brands w/ HA commanding a 12% revenue premium so they might be willing to sacrifice some efficiency for a revenue premium from just branding.
Iʻm surprised they arenʻt launching NRT and ICN w/ the 787s. Better overall product except no wifi.
and to think they just got done slapping that “proudly all boeing” stickers back on their planes :)
i wonder how long it’ll take them to get rid of their A330s?
Alaska Hawaiian “4950”
Will be the new brand name
Did not anyone check what they’ve already registered ? One side of the plane is Alaska Livery, the other is Hawaiian. There’s a 787 being painted now in Seattle.
Simular to how Lufthansa operates the Swiss, Austrian, edelweiss, etc lines.
Indeed, although I think they have separate AOCs, and don't often swap aircraft once painted.
There are even a few aircraft branded "Star Alliance".
If using jetbridges, what proportion of passengers even notice the external livery?
LHG is very different because each carrier has ther own AOC, OCC, and procedures. Swapping within the group doesn't work, unless it's a charter / wetlease.
Who really cares?
Albertsons owns Safeway and operates them both. Office Depot bought Office Max and kept brand names.
Exxon/Mobile. CompUSA/Computer City
Spectrum Cable/Time Warner Cable
And on and on.
It will be ok.
Retail operations are very different than airline operations... Much simpler to operate a mix of stores under two different brands. You're not really cross-staffing and don't need to differentiate procurement / supply chain aspects as a store is a store generically within a company aside from SKU mix which varies even within a single brand.
It can certainly be done, it's a question of whether the airline is willing to bear the costs and tradeoffs...
Retail operations are very different than airline operations... Much simpler to operate a mix of stores under two different brands. You're not really cross-staffing and don't need to differentiate procurement / supply chain aspects as a store is a store generically within a company aside from SKU mix which varies even within a single brand.
It can certainly be done, it's a question of whether the airline is willing to bear the costs and tradeoffs associated with maintaining the distinct brands.
I don't see how this branding can possibly work on the aircraft. Alaska flows aircraft that serve Hawaii throughout its network. They will want flexibility to shift aircraft seasonally. No way will they want widebody aircraft branded Hawaiian for service Hawaii but Alaska if it serves Seattle or Alaska.
Having flight attendant uniforms change based on destination and food and cocktail offerings - that makes sense. But dedicating aircraft does not. No reason an...
I don't see how this branding can possibly work on the aircraft. Alaska flows aircraft that serve Hawaii throughout its network. They will want flexibility to shift aircraft seasonally. No way will they want widebody aircraft branded Hawaiian for service Hawaii but Alaska if it serves Seattle or Alaska.
Having flight attendant uniforms change based on destination and food and cocktail offerings - that makes sense. But dedicating aircraft does not. No reason an aircraft cannot operate HNL-ANC-JFK-SFO-HNL.
As an interim solution, what is the objection to having a dual-branded livery for the first 3-4 years? It has been done before.
One side of the aircraft painted in the AS design and the other side painted in HA. Both liveries are 'base' white and the idea of a dual livery would a) preserve both names and b) provide a marketing exposure for the other brand. That would solve the 'appearance' issue at any...
As an interim solution, what is the objection to having a dual-branded livery for the first 3-4 years? It has been done before.
One side of the aircraft painted in the AS design and the other side painted in HA. Both liveries are 'base' white and the idea of a dual livery would a) preserve both names and b) provide a marketing exposure for the other brand. That would solve the 'appearance' issue at any destination - while activating marketing recognition at each port. It would also solve the complex issue of having a 'dedicated' frame issue for each individual route. In other word, each frame could fly to any port and not be restricted to individual cities / ports or regions.
The other issue however would be F/A uniforms and interior frame fit-out. Uniforms (as in F/A staffing) could easily be 'mixed, showcasing both brands - or, a new design uniform (upper half being 'mountains, lower half being 'islands') being one option .. or a new 'bland' blank colour, common to both brands.
The issue of 'print' / media branding for the entire group is not such an issue. A good designer could easily come up with a supportive 'dual brand' portfolio - the issue is whether to incorporate graphics (Alaska vs the HA Pulani images) or redesign using a 'text-only' name version using the two airline's names.
Both companies have an innovative, historical marketing streak. I would be fairly confident that the unified marketing teams could come up with a unified 'Alaska Group' program, which successfully maintains the relevance of and history of both brands.
Honestly, I'd have just said "anything going west of CONUS not going to Alaska becomes Hawaiian; CONUS and east is Alaska." There might be some goofball exceptions (e.g. you might get a stray tag flight under the "wrong" brand), but it would feel more sustainable to just make Hawaiian the TPAC brand.
Flying across the Pacific is a really long way when connecting from the Middle and East sides of the US. The dual branding will be kind of like sitting in your Blue and Gray living room decor lounge for the mainland flight west and then…
lounging in your Purple and Blue Hawaiian Dining room for drinks and cocktails prior to the start of your Hawaiiian business trip or vacation. I actually proposed such a concept...
Flying across the Pacific is a really long way when connecting from the Middle and East sides of the US. The dual branding will be kind of like sitting in your Blue and Gray living room decor lounge for the mainland flight west and then…
lounging in your Purple and Blue Hawaiian Dining room for drinks and cocktails prior to the start of your Hawaiiian business trip or vacation. I actually proposed such a concept at a previous carrier but unfortunately the realities of finances after the 9/11 attacks never allowed this to be studied further.
Congratulations Alaska and Hawaiian
Wouldn't it be simpler to put Alaska livery on one side and Hawaiian on the other. Later you can go to a blended livery.
As nice as it would be to keep it, I don't see how long-term the Hawaiian branding stays, except perhaps on dedicated intra-HI aircraft and widebody aircraft that aren't rotating around the network (maybe legacy non-retrofitted aircraft with the pair seating), which then doesn't last forever. The "Hawaiian branding" issue is AS/HA's version of hubs in Memphis, Cleveland, etc.
This is horrible news for AS elites. AS used to fly AS metal from SAN to HNl on AS metal which meant that an AS high level elites you could get AS premium economy on these flights for the price of an economy ticket. After their meeting on December 10 it seems everything is on HA metal and there is no longer an AS nonstop on AS metal to HNL from SAN (I looked for...
This is horrible news for AS elites. AS used to fly AS metal from SAN to HNl on AS metal which meant that an AS high level elites you could get AS premium economy on these flights for the price of an economy ticket. After their meeting on December 10 it seems everything is on HA metal and there is no longer an AS nonstop on AS metal to HNL from SAN (I looked for the end on August 2025 and it’s all HA with no premium economy and only AS metal with a connection via SEA.) Sorry AS, but if this is the case I’ll fly another carrier.
Seating will be changed for new marketing to match the carriers options. There are a lot of changes coming. Premium seating and offerings are driving the plan. The company has stated this several times. Relax.
Pretty interesting to think of a wide body plane with an Alaska Airlines livery!
Here's a preview!:
https://www.instagram.com/aeroconcepts/p/CLZWksGh_B1/
It’s nice to see the HA brand not reduced to just flights between the islands… but the synergy issue is real. I would suggest having more HA-branded aircraft than is necessary and sometimes operating them on mainland routes. Having the HA brand as vacationers go on holiday is important but having a HA-livery A330 between Seattle and Japan is fine
Oh, the branding Arm Chair CEOs are out in force.... Branding is so much more than a livery. If you look at the history of flights to Hawaii, there is lots of opportunity to see how other airlines like United treated Hawaii flights differently. In fact, I think AA even offers a meal in economy! That's not in-line with their domestic service standard. On United, flight attendants still like to wear special flowers indicating the...
Oh, the branding Arm Chair CEOs are out in force.... Branding is so much more than a livery. If you look at the history of flights to Hawaii, there is lots of opportunity to see how other airlines like United treated Hawaii flights differently. In fact, I think AA even offers a meal in economy! That's not in-line with their domestic service standard. On United, flight attendants still like to wear special flowers indicating the destination, but they used to offer Royal Hawaiian Service. Here's a commercial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrR-9JjcCug No reason Alaska can't do something similar.
"Used to." Past tense. Tells the story about how important and valuable that 'branding' really was in commanding any meaningful premium in the market.
Used to. In the past. Hawaiian is unique amongst other mainland carriers, including Alaska, which are basically almost all identical. Hawaii has a unique culture which the airline wants to represent from boarding to disembarking.
Valerie from DAAAAALLLAS with a plumeria hibiscus in her hair doesn’t have the same appeal.
Valerie from Dalllllllas - LMAO.
“Do ya wanna mooooovie? Have I asked ya, do ya wanna mooovie? Do ya wanna mooooovie?”
RE: Hawaii has a unique culture which the airline wants to represent from boarding to disembarking.
I didn't plan on mentioning it, but Icarus is right. The FAs on HA embody the Aloha spirit, and it is unique from the other airlines. As someone else mentioned, HA is the only airline that offers a full meal in economy when flying from the mainland. My many interactions with HA Customer Service have proven to me...
RE: Hawaii has a unique culture which the airline wants to represent from boarding to disembarking.
I didn't plan on mentioning it, but Icarus is right. The FAs on HA embody the Aloha spirit, and it is unique from the other airlines. As someone else mentioned, HA is the only airline that offers a full meal in economy when flying from the mainland. My many interactions with HA Customer Service have proven to me that in spite of many typical policies and fees, they are eager to accommodate you and waive those fees. I've even gotten full refunds on 'non-refundable' tickets. Of course, I have status on HA, which helps, but I've never felt that it was the reason for their friendliness and flexibility.
I'm more interested in how Hawaiian will integrate into One World or not. If they will have the same airline operating certificate, maybe it means Hawaiian will join OW?
Probably the same way when US got acquired by AA; become a subsidiary of AS and join Oneworld before being fully integrated. I could see the same process play out with the OZ and KE merger with the former leaving Star and becoming a subsidiary of KE and eventually joining Sky.
One thing I find strange about the HA/AL merger is the availability of award flights. As a resident of Hawaii, I often fly the non-stop Honolulu to New York City flight that happens once a day. I generally use points. If I try to book through the HA portal, I can get a one-way economy seat for as low as 26.25K points.
However, if I try to book a flight from HNL to JFK using...
One thing I find strange about the HA/AL merger is the availability of award flights. As a resident of Hawaii, I often fly the non-stop Honolulu to New York City flight that happens once a day. I generally use points. If I try to book through the HA portal, I can get a one-way economy seat for as low as 26.25K points.
However, if I try to book a flight from HNL to JFK using the AL portal, I'm only offered flights that stop in Seattle or San Francisco with a minimum 6-hour layover for as low as 30K points. The HA flight is not even offered, although they are now the same airline. As an alternative, I can fly HNL to EWR with one stop in economy for 20K.
Since you can transfer points between the two airlines at a one-to-one exchange, you'd think they'd offer the same flights, whether HA or AL.
I think you mean... AS?
The passenger flows and NUC constructs are different, so for now, they will sell according to their individual carrier structures.
This is not uncommon, and so it's up to the passenger to find the best deal and what works for them.
It's interesting that Alaska Airlines plans to maintain separate identities for itself and Hawaiian Airlines after the acquisition. I was hoping they'd do the same when they purchased Virgin America. It was disappointing to see Virgin America, with its innovative spirit and stylish flair, absorbed by Alaska Airlines. While they added tge mood lighting, WiFi, and music were welcome additions like Virgin had, the loss of the Virgin America brand is a real shame. I’m...
It's interesting that Alaska Airlines plans to maintain separate identities for itself and Hawaiian Airlines after the acquisition. I was hoping they'd do the same when they purchased Virgin America. It was disappointing to see Virgin America, with its innovative spirit and stylish flair, absorbed by Alaska Airlines. While they added tge mood lighting, WiFi, and music were welcome additions like Virgin had, the loss of the Virgin America brand is a real shame. I’m happy Hawaiian Airlines will keep their name in Hawaii.
AS played catch and kill with Virgin America.
At first, I had assumed that the Hawaiian branding would only stay on interisland aircraft and operate as a subfleet within the Alaska Air group. I mean, Alaska kept Horizon Air as a separate brand (and fleet) for decades before finally integrating it fully (well, at least the branding). So, this is not a new exercise for them. AS also has quite a bit of experience being an intrastate carrier up north that the community...
At first, I had assumed that the Hawaiian branding would only stay on interisland aircraft and operate as a subfleet within the Alaska Air group. I mean, Alaska kept Horizon Air as a separate brand (and fleet) for decades before finally integrating it fully (well, at least the branding). So, this is not a new exercise for them. AS also has quite a bit of experience being an intrastate carrier up north that the community is VERY reliant upon.
My guess is that legacy HA aircraft will remain branded as HA and and flow through system as such. Once AS figures out their fleet consolidation strategy, they will slowly taper off the HA brand. I wouldn't be surprised to see the 787s rebranded as Alaska, while the older A330s stay HA branded until retirement. The A321 fleet, is really the one that remains to be seen what they do? Probably no change at first. The 737s will probably wind up in rotation on interisland services. We could see some sort of double livery a la KLM/Northwest. Hawaiian by Alaska Airlines or whatever the marketing group likes best.
It would be no different than the rental car companies today. Enterprise, Alamo and National are the same company with different brands using the same desks, agents and cars. I only hope they'll serve POG on every Alaska flight.
In the long run, everything will be Alaska. There will be some planes painted as Hawaiian and some flights will be operated by planes painted in the other airline's livery. However, the policies will be the same. The napkins will be the same. The flight attendant's uniforms will be the same except maybe a different name tag or scarf.
Bingo...the one accurate comment here.
You are wrong about the uniforms.
It would be great if they keep the Hawaiian Air uniforms - hopefully they do. It might simplify things if they move them over to the same supplier as the Alaska uniforms though - we would appreciate the added business and enjoy having a new uniform program to maintain. :)
I don't see a problem. It makes general sense, and it won't be any real issue on the probably rare occasion that they might need to swap aircraft.
The issue is ensuring a standardized in-flight product and service, to manage customer expectation and streamline costs.
The exterior paint simply won't matter, as the flights will be sold with both the AS and HA codes... which will help solve some of the brand awareness...
I don't see a problem. It makes general sense, and it won't be any real issue on the probably rare occasion that they might need to swap aircraft.
The issue is ensuring a standardized in-flight product and service, to manage customer expectation and streamline costs.
The exterior paint simply won't matter, as the flights will be sold with both the AS and HA codes... which will help solve some of the brand awareness challenges in Asia...and presumably Europe...but also substantially solved via the oneworld alliance across TPAC and TATL... the flights will likely be sold under multiple oneworld codes.
I'm also going to make a guess... the tails have to stay the same, but the body of the aircraft might get a hybrid design. It'll take time, as they won't want to pull aircraft out of operation, so it would be done during standard maintenance heavy checks.
If they intend on keeping the HA livery, I can see a decal slapped on the fuselage and go along the lines of "Operated by Alaska" or something like "Alaska Air Group".
I just wonder how that trickles down the cabin finishes and hard product. Do they plan to come up with a new colour palette or? And can we see a possible top-up of some 787s as well?
Sounds like asking for trouble. Infrequent flyers will be confused. Not to mention the costs of maintaining two brands.
I cannot imagine that this would be a viable long term strategy. It's confusing for customers as well as employees, and it will be an operational disaster. I would assume this is an interim, short term solution and that they will eventually need to rebrand the entire enterprise.
Sounds like a huge mess in the making
The combined HA/AS network looks something like the old Western Airlines. The Only Way to Fly. I doubt Delta would sell them that branding though!
A new name would’ve been nice. Pac Am anyone…?
Hawlaska Airlines?
Perhaps some White Tails to flex the fleet as needed?
I listened to the podcast w/ their CEO Ben. It has to do w/ the fact that the Hawaiian branding is better for flights to/from Hawaii, as well as the point of sale being stronger for Asia.
Given that Alaska is functionally a domestic only carrier w/ some short haul, no one in Asia has ever really heard of Alaska. The HA brand is important for marketing their flights. HA is very close w JAL....
I listened to the podcast w/ their CEO Ben. It has to do w/ the fact that the Hawaiian branding is better for flights to/from Hawaii, as well as the point of sale being stronger for Asia.
Given that Alaska is functionally a domestic only carrier w/ some short haul, no one in Asia has ever really heard of Alaska. The HA brand is important for marketing their flights. HA is very close w JAL. Many Japanese nationals love flying Hawaiian, they will not know anything about Alaska.
Alaska made a deal with Hawaii's state government not to change the name. That's why they didn't object to the deal.