 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups Destinations USA and CanadaEuropeAustralia and NZAsiaLatin AmericaCaribbean IslandsAfricaTravel Types Air TravelCruisesRV Travel |
Travel Forum / Travel Types / Air Travel / July 2008Sydney to LA on American Airlines question
My itinerary, from a travel agent, says American Airlines flight 7363 operated by Qantas. Usually, it just says Qantas and a two-digit number. Am I really on an American Airlines plane, not a Qantas plane? > My itinerary, from a travel agent, says American Airlines flight 7363 > operated by Qantas. Usually, it just says Qantas and a two-digit > number. Am I really on an American Airlines plane, not a Qantas plane? American do not fly to Australia. It's a Qantas flight QF11. Those stupid codeshare flights, causing about three times as many flights as necessary listing on airport departure and arrivals boards. Regards David Bennetts >>My itinerary, from a travel agent, says American Airlines flight 7363 >>operated by Qantas. Usually, it just says Qantas and a two-digit [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > David Bennetts Yes, but from an AA frequent flier's perspective, it's not all bad. After all, AA codeshares on other airlines earn the same mileage and elite bonuses as if the flight was on an AA plane. This can not always be said when buying a ticket using the AA partner's flight number. >>>My itinerary, from a travel agent, says American Airlines flight 7363 >>>operated by Qantas. Usually, it just says Qantas and a two-digit >>>number. Am I really on an American Airlines plane, not a Qantas plane? >> American do not fly to Australia. It's a Qantas flight QF11. Those stupid >> codeshare flights, causing about three times as many flights as necessary >> listing on airport departure and arrivals boards. ------------------- What's even more confusing is that you need to check in with and follow time+gate changes from Qantas, as AA has nothing to do with this flight. But flying a codeshare # has benefits, like FF-miles and price differences. I once flew from Athens to Frankfurt on Lufthansa using an Agean Air # for much less than if I had used the Lufthansa #. I had MS Expedia to thank for that info. >>>>My itinerary, from a travel agent, says American Airlines flight 7363 >>>>operated by Qantas. Usually, it just says Qantas and a two-digit [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > for much less than if I had used the Lufthansa #. I had MS Expedia to > thank for that info. Codeshare is fine - but the airlines should eliminate the confusing, stupid and un-necessary practice of pretending you are travelling on their flight, when the aircraft is in some-one else's livery and crewed by some-one else. In this case it's a Qantas flight 11 the passenger is travelling on, not a pretend AA one. If you book thru AA and get their frequent flier points that's fine, but it's only necessary to show the actual carrier and flight number on the e-ticket and destination and departure screens at the airport. Regards David Bennetts Australia > > Those stupid > > codeshare flights, causing about three times as many flights as necessary > > listing on airport departure and arrivals boards. > Yes, but from an AA frequent flier's perspective, it's not all bad. > After all, AA codeshares on other airlines earn the same mileage and > elite bonuses as if the flight was on an AA plane. Another part of the puzzle: I think it also helps travelers who are with the US government (or who are subject to its rules because of where their money comes from) comply with a law that says they have to fly on an US-flag carrier if at all possible. So it looks, walks, and quacks like the proverbial duck but everyone involved has agreed to squint hard enough to make it look like an eagle. Long as I get there and back safe... I know not how codeshares are accounted for behind the scenes, but presumably the US carrier gets some money out of such deals, probably a little if they just sell the ticket under their name, more if they actually operate the flight. --Joe >Another part of the puzzle: I think it also helps travelers who are >with the US government (or who are subject to its rules because of >where their money comes from) comply with a law that says they have >to fly on an US-flag carrier if at all possible. No such luck. For a recent trip to Seattle on a government contract, I asked whether I could get a ticket on the UA nonstop from Toronto which is an AC codeshare. No go, had to be an actual US-flag plane, so I had to take a connection. R's, John >>Another part of the puzzle: I think it also helps travelers who are >>with the US government (or who are subject to its rules because of [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > R's, > John Yet DOD wanted to spend BILLIONS by buying tankers from the Airbus people. >Yet DOD wanted to spend BILLIONS by buying tankers from the Airbus people. Which would be built in the US and have a percentage of US parts not all that different from Boeing's. >Yet DOD wanted to spend BILLIONS by buying tankers from the Airbus people. Which would be built in the US and have a percentage of US parts not all that different from Boeing's. And the profit would go where? >>Yet DOD wanted to spend BILLIONS by buying tankers from the Airbus people. > >Which would be built in the US and have a percentage of US parts not >all that different from Boeing's. > >And the profit would go where? Northrop-Grumman said the tanker project will add 25,000 US jobs. It's not clear whether that includes GE employees making the engines. Beyond that, the major owners of GE and N-G are the usual mutual funds. EADS is indeed owned by German banks and the French government, but I hope I don't have to explain to you the difference between revenue and profit. If the A380 is any guide, there won't be any profit anyway. >>>Yet DOD wanted to spend BILLIONS by buying tankers from the Airbus people. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Northrop-Grumman said the tanker project will add 25,000 US jobs. And how many jobs wou;d Boeing have gotten from the contract? > a ticket on the UA nonstop from Toronto > which is an AC codeshare. No go, had to be an actual US-flag plane, > so I had to take a connection. They might be harder-nosed in the bit of the government that funded your contract, or maybe your program officer liked his rules strict and his interpretations narrow. (Though the government does similar things in similar ways under the same laws, the details of how any given rule is enforced can vary from one branch to another.) Working for a contractor (not directly for Uncle Sam), I've found myself able, for example, to spend official money on a Delta branded flight to/from CDG without fretting about whether the plane and crew were actually Air France. Your (frequent flyer) mileage may vary; and note that these things change from time to time and my experience is a few years stale. (As a patriotic sort, I'd rather fly a US-flag carrier if all else is equal or even close, but as a business traveler, I often find myself weighing the timetable in one hand and the price in the other, with any additional factors relegated to any other hands I may have.) --Joe > I know not how codeshares are accounted for behind the scenes, but > presumably the US carrier gets some money out of such deals, probably > a little if they just sell the ticket under their name, more if they > actually operate the flight. When you fly on a QF operated AA flight number, it means that AA purchased wholesale inventory from Qantas, and can sell it however it wants. When you fly on a QF operated with QF flight numbers, but sold on AA ticket, it means that AA acted as a glorified travel agent and sold you a ticket on another airline. It gets more complex because of the way the contracts are signed which may allow one carrier to use the other carrier's inventory if available (operating airline would usually more flexibility than the code-share partner). > When you fly on a QF operated AA flight number, it means that AA > purchased wholesale inventory from Qantas, and can sell it however it > wants. That is certainly one way of doing it but by no means the only way. The KLM/Northwest agreement has them operating as a single "virtual airline" and some form of revenue sharing agreement. >> When you fly on a QF operated AA flight number, it means that AA >> purchased wholesale inventory from Qantas, and can sell it however it [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > KLM/Northwest agreement has them operating as a single "virtual airline" > and some form of revenue sharing agreement. That's true, but KLM/NW have U.S./E.U. antitrust immunity; I don't think AA/QF have the same. > That's true, but KLM/NW have U.S./E.U. antitrust immunity; I don't > think AA/QF have the same. Last time I flew from Australia to the SF Bay Area (all on QANTAS), I stopped in Fiji, then to Los Angeles (code share on Air Pacific), then to the SF Bay Area (code share on American Airlines). >> That's true, but KLM/NW have U.S./E.U. antitrust immunity; I don't >> think AA/QF have the same. > > Last time I flew from Australia to the SF Bay Area (all on QANTAS), I > stopped in Fiji, then to Los Angeles (code share on Air Pacific), then to > the SF Bay Area (code share on American Airlines). That has nothing to do with my comment. QF, FJ, and American all code-share with each other (Qantas actually has a management agreement with Air Pacific), but anti-trust immunity is necessary to pool revenues and schedules. The realtionship between KLM and Northwest, in that respect, is totally different than the one between Qantas and American. With KLM/NW, it doesn't matter whose airplane you fly on; there is a revenue sharing formula. In the case of AA codesharing on Qantas (and most other code share relationships), American simply markets the QF flight as their own and sells the seat. Whether they make a mark up on the QF ticket or not doesn't change the nature of the relationship. Jeff You are flying on a Qantas flight (and aircraft), using an AA ticket. Codeshare. > My itinerary, from a travel agent, says American Airlines flight 7363 > operated by Qantas. Usually, it just says Qantas and a two-digit > number. Am I really on an American Airlines plane, not a Qantas plane? > You are flying on a Qantas flight (and aircraft), using an AA ticket. > > Codeshare. And using AA terminal 4 at LAX. >> You are flying on a Qantas flight (and aircraft), using an AA ticket. >> >> Codeshare. > > And using AA terminal 4 at LAX. Have they been doing that for long? I see from Qantas website that some of their other flights (ex Melb and Bris for example) come thru the Tom Bradley Terminal - which as I recollect was a bunfight with immigration and baggage handling. Came thru a few years back with United, their terminal was a much more pleasant experience. Regards David Bennetts Terminal??????? Anyone using it pays a commercial rate for that use - so point is????? >> You are flying on a Qantas flight (and aircraft), using an AA ticket. >> >> Codeshare. > > And using AA terminal 4 at LAX. > My itinerary, from a travel agent, says American Airlines flight 7363 > operated by Qantas. Usually, it just says Qantas and a two-digit > number. Am I really on an American Airlines plane, not a Qantas plane? This is a code share. The aircraft and crew are QANTAS, but American also markets it as their flight 7363. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.