Sydney to LA on American Airlines question

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

John Levine wrote:

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

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.

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

Ad absurdum per aspera wrote:

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).

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.

John Levine wrote:
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.

And how many jobs wou;d Boeing have gotten from the contract?

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.