InsideFlyer.com [English] United States InsideFlyer.uk [English] United Kingdom InsideFlyer.de [German] Germany InsideFlyer.no [Norwegian] Norway InsideFlyer.se [Swedish] Sweden InsideFlyer.dk [Danish] Denmark InsideFlyer.nl [Dutch] Benelux
Discussion in 'Miles & More | Lufthansa, SWISS, Austrian/Partners' started by LFCorsten, Feb 4, 2011.
| Print Topic
What is your opinion on this?
Longterm maybe once SK has made it's homework, shortterm Lufthansa has todo it's own homework, therefore no.
I thought that LH would have bought them a long time ago, but LH won't touch them with a 10-foot pole, due to their strong unions and other problems...
Anyway, it's best that there is some actual alternative to LH still around!
LH has their hands full with the BD and Brussels Airlines takeover also.
... and don't forget about Austrian
For alternatives it would be good SAS stays independent. Even no airline in Star Alliance is really independent from Lufthansa.
True, at least for Europe. I have a feeling since the Local Scandinavian authorities are part owners, they, along with possibly the EU, would oppose this consolidation into the LH group.
Nevertheless, for *A, the EU and TATL markets are largely dependent upon LH in addition to the FRA hub being the center of the *A.
Lufthansa started *A and of course they are strong. Sometimes to strong.
Exactly, and strong where it matters, ie TATL, Asia, and Middle East. As Asia is growing (economically) ever so rapidly, I think Asia will be a key to an airline's global success and the two largest airlines by market cap in *A are in Asia (1. Air China, 2. Singapore Airlines) and LH excels in terms of Asian and TATL destinations where as SK is relatively weak in the long haul market.
I'm having the same thoughts, but BMI was never strong on TATL either.
Very True. bmi seemed to be perpetually developing their product and never seemed to quite hash its product out in due time. First MAN-ORD/IAD, then they went leisure, focusing on LAS, Antigua, and Barbados, then they went Africa, then Mid-East. Hard product seemed consistent though C, Y+, Y. I think ownership by LH will allow BD to define itself as an airline, then focus on expansion and long haul growth. Hopefully we'll see a reemergence of BD in the longhaul sector.
SK has it's identity. Now it needs to figure out where it will grow, with or without the assistance of LH.
To be honest I think BMI will be used mainly as feeder for LH. I'm afraid that BMI won't be a big lonhaul airline.
SK has no money to grow. And the unions have to allow changes.
IIRC SK has over 20 different unions meddling in this business.
As long as this situation isn't resolved anyone in a right state of mind shouldn't touch it with a bargepole !
I think SK needs to shed all of this first. If this is possible outside of bankruptcy - I don't knwo?
Good point. But sometimes the right state of mind is missing when partnering or taking over a candidate like SK.
Let's hope LH keeps their cool. They have enough management ressources already bundled in OS, BD and SN.
SK's 20-something unions will probably stop it nothing to prevent any takeover from LH. Given the current situation, I think it's better for LH to stay away.Besides, SK is also owned by no less than three governments.....and I haven't heard that they will let go of their scandinavian "heritage"....
The Scandinavian governements all say they want to sell their stake. What they don't say are the requirements: the other goverments have to sell at the same time, the home airport should not suffer in terms of jobs and connections. I am not sure they have an opinion on who they should sell to.
Or asked differently: Who is willing to pay for K?
That's the point. I don't see any reason why you should buy in these obvious issues. It will not be possible to restructure SK as they did with LX.
And trying wit OS.
No way LH should buy SK. It would be wiser to let SK go bankrupt, then LH could take over and would be free to restructure as required without too many obstacles. They might even be seen as some kind of saviours.
IMO it depends on the business model. Taking over SK is IMO a good idea if LH expands the routes of SK with focus on european travellers going to Scandinavia or to the Far-East. If LH would just see the SK customer in Scandinavia as somebody who can be funelled through one of the LH hubs to fill their longhaul flights it will be a desaster.
So if SK would be structured in the same way as LH did with LX it could be a great success IMO.
In the short term LH and SK are so well integrated that there is probably not that much to be had from buying it. For now let SK struggle with their re-sizing themselves, and then either buy sometime in the future when the worst mess has been sorted, or wait until it is broke, and then buy the leftovers.
I agree with you ralfkrippner, but SK in its current state and form is not very open for restructuring. Not even by SK management (!). This is one the major challenges for SK today, and links together with a lot of their other challenges such as their cost base. For that reason I think it's wise for LH to keep their distance and see what happens, a suitable opportunity might well present itself at a later stage.
Wait and see seems to be LH's way of business anyhow... ;-)
Problem might be that other airlines also want to grow through aquisitions. And it would hurt LH and star very much if a carrier like AF, BA, SU, EK, VS would be able to get together enough cash to buy into SK...