There are persistent rumors that Kenya Airways wants to leave Skyteam. And the reasons given are reminiscent of our latest article on the future of airline alliances, of which it is an excellent practical illustration.
Skyteam is too small
First reason: Skyteam is too small. I don’t think this is the main reason but it is not to be taken lightly.
To date, Skyteam has 19 members, compared to 13 for OneWorld and 28 for Star Alliance. A “middle” position in the competition between the 3 big alliances. In our opinion Skyteam’s problem is not so much its size as its geographical coverage and positioning.
In terms of geographical coverage, Delta’s presence makes it very competitive in the United States, and its presence in China should not be overlooked (although China Southern will soon be leaving the alliance), but compared to Star Alliance, its coverage of Europe is not perfect. In Asia, it does not compete with Star Alliance, which can count on Thai, Singapore and Asiana, or even OneWorld (Cathay and Malaysia), while Garuda (despite its excellent service), Korean and Vietnam Airlines are a little light. Finally, it has no presence in Japan (ANA is Star Alliance and Japan Airlines OneWorld), nor in Oceania (Air New Zealand in Star Alliance and Qantas in OneWorld).
As for its positioning, it has fewer “premium” airlines than its competitors if we rely on the skytrax ranking alone (only one 5-star airline: Garuda).
But, let’s repeat, for an airline like Kenya Airways being a member of Skyteam does not seem to us to be a handicap, quite the contrary. Moreover, the airline would not consider leaving Skyteam to join a “better alliance” but to leave the alliance system altogether.
Focus on opportunistic and tactical initiatives
As we wrote last week, the alliance is a hybrid, even lukewarm, collaboration modality between partnerships and joint ventures. And Kenya Airways is a member of several joint ventures (including one with Air France-KLM) and is preparing to create others. The advantage:a very market-driven approach that produces concrete and tangible business benefits and makes it possible to be, depending on the routes, ambitions and competitive advantages of each party, sometimes a partner, sometimes a competitor, where the alliance implies a sort of non-aggression pact.
In short, Kenya Airways intends to maximize its business in certain markets even if it means abandoning others by finding a specific financial and industrial partner each time.
It is not certain that the passenger will be able to find his way in terms of loyalty program, but a reflection (officially nothing has been decided) which says a lot about the way in which airlines, especially those with an essentially regional/continental presence, envisage their partnerships in the current context. Kenya wants fewer partners but much more engagement in the business alongside them. Who would blame them?
Photo : Kenya Airways by Nieuwland Photography via Shutterstock
