Qantas, a member of the oneworld alliance, has an odd set of partnerships.
Its closest partner is Emirates, which isn’t a member of oneworld. One of Emirates’ main rivals is Qatar, which is in oneworld.
Qantas dumped British Airways, also a member of the oneworld alliance, in favor of its Emirates deal.
Here’s the thing: while the Qantas-British Airways deal didn’t make a lot of sense… flying passengers between Europe and Australia via London isn’t attractive for most Europeans outside the U.K. or for most Aussies heading places other than the U.K. because of the extra flying on what’s already a tortuously long route… but also because of Heathrow.
An interchange in the Middle East does make sense, or even Eastern or potentially Southern Europe.
But Emirates would seem to get the far better end of the deal. Qantas is already the largest player in the international market to and from Australia. Transferring their passengers in the MIddle East means bringing their passengers to Emirates to carry onward. And it means that Aussies are happy to fly Emirates rather than Qantas.
Indeed, Emirates now carries two thirds as much international traffic to and from Australia as Qantas does. That figure was shocking to me (although it excludes Qantas’ wholly-owned low cost subsidiary Jetstar).
- You can join the 40,000+ people who see these deals and analysis every day — sign up to receive posts by email (just one e-mail per day) or subscribe to the RSS feed. It’s free. You can also follow me on Twitter for the latest deals. Don’t miss out!
I agree EK got the better end of the deal. Given the choice of flying EK or QF from LHR to SYD at the same price, I’d say most people would probably fly EK. Between the two carriers, EK definitely has a superior IFE system and if I’m flying premium cabin, I’d prefer having an onboard bar for a loooonnnggg ultra longhaul flight! 😉
From what I recall, the QF/EK deal was done before Qatar joined Oneworld.